Nice collection of links, here, Neil.
A./
On 2/17/2013 10:52 AM, Neil Harris wrote:
On 17/02/13 10:48, Philippe Verdy wrote:
I was not citing empirical results but things that are regulated by
legislation.
And your existing empirical results are just nfomal tests ignoring
important parts of
Earlier today I posted in a forum, mentioning the Private Use Areas.
I referenced section 16.5 of the following document.
http://www.unicode.org/versions/Unicode6.2.0/ch16.pdf
I felt that I needed to write as follows, in order to provide clarity.
quote
There is a lot about what is called
This looks quite clear to me. If I create something and somebody else uses my
creation in the intended context, he agrees to my definition. his agreement is
private, outside the standard, since the same code points may represent a
multitude of different meanings. It may also be the result of a
On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 7:13 PM, Erkki I Kolehmainen e...@iki.fi wrote:
It may also be the result of a negotiating process within a special purpose
user group.
I also see no problem with the current definition. Since the whole
point of the standard is to ease the exchange of text if a
2013-02-18 17:36, Shriramana Sharma wrote:
On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 7:13 PM, Erkki I Kolehmainen e...@iki.fi wrote:
It may also be the result of a negotiating process within a special purpose
user group.
I also see no problem with the current definition. Since the whole
point of the standard
The first sentence of section 16.5 is as follows.
quote
Private-use characters are assigned Unicode code points whose interpretation is
not specified by this standard and whose use may be determined by private
agreement among cooperating users.
end quote
Suppose that there is a person,
On 2/18/2013 5:43 AM, Erkki I Kolehmainen wrote:
This looks quite clear to me. If I create something and somebody else uses my
creation in the intended context, he agrees to my definition. his agreement is
private, outside the standard, since the same code points may represent a
multitude of
On 18/02/13 18:09, William_J_G Overington wrote:
The first sentence of section 16.5 is as follows.
quote
Private-use characters are assigned Unicode code points whose interpretation is
not specified by this standard and whose use may be determined by private
agreement among cooperating
Asmus Freytag asmusf at ix dot netcom dot com wrote:
Note that the default treatment for sorting, captilization, and a host
of other functions is not going to work for you or most users, for
that matter, because, unlike the case of fonts, there's no widely
supported data format for submitting
Someone asked off-list if this query were related to a proposal. It is,
to Markus Scherer's L2/12-108. That has been added to the the list of
'stability' guarantees at
http://www.unicode.org/policies/stability_policy.html 'Property
Value Stability', Version 2.1.0+. The redundantly retroactive
On Mon, 18 Feb 2013 18:34:27 +0200
Jukka K. Korpela jkorp...@cs.tut.fi wrote:
Perhaps something like the following might be a useful addition
(e.g., as second paragraph of subsection 16.5):
A private agreement that constitutes some meaning and use for a code
point may be explicit, as a
Well, it isn't prohibited, so I guess you will need to be forever vigilant in
view of the possibility that somebody might get it in their head to encode some
combining mark that isn't already accounted for in Tibetan *and* that they
would simultaneously insist that a precomposed form of that
On Monday 18 February 2013 07:43:00 Erkki I Kolehmainen wrote:
This looks quite clear to me. If I create something and somebody else uses
my creation in the intended context, he agrees to my definition. his
agreement is private, outside the standard, since the same code points may
represent a
Ne vous moquez pas de monsieur Verdy: il s’ agit là du dernier des
Mohicans polymathes ! ☺
Charlie
Op zondag 17 februari 2013 schreef Asmus Freytag:
Would not be the first time that Mr. Verdy's statements are in an
interesting relation to empirically determined results.
:)
A./
Toll, eine dreisprachige Nachricht! Wer macht weiter?
A./
On 2/18/2013 10:25 PM, Charlie Ruland wrote:
Ne vous moquez pas de monsieur Verdy: il s’ agit là du dernier des
Mohicans polymathes ! ☺
Charlie
Op zondag 17 februari 2013 schreef Asmus Freytag:
Would not be the first time that Mr.
Trilingue sì. Perché la lingua madre del signor Verdy è quella francese.
And it was in reply to your English message. En het Nederlands kwam van
Thunderbird. Tja, so kann’s gehen.
对不起。
Charlie
Asmus Freytag:
Toll, eine dreisprachige Nachricht! Wer macht weiter?
A./
On 2/18/2013 10:25 PM,
16 matches
Mail list logo
