Re: What does one do if the encoding is unknown and all you have is a sequence of bytes?

Popping up a level. ICU (and some other libraries) have heuristic encoding detection, that will take a sequence of bytes and come up with a likely encoding id. Mark * * *— Il meglio è l’inimico del bene —* ** On Fri, Jul 19, 2013 at 8:40 PM, Whis

RE: Ways to show Unicode contents on Windows?

I'm sorry that Microsoft's approach to product servicing does not meet your expectations. It is what it is, however. The costs involved in servicing the XP code base (which was forked from all subsequent Windows versions in 2001, so effectively does date back to then) are greater than I think yo

Re: Ways to show Unicode contents on Windows?

Peter Constable wrote: > Behalf Of Ilya Zakharevich wrote: > > Why would one NEED to upgrade the OS to use Old Italic? > You can't expect an OS like Windows XP to support Old Italic > characters that weren't even defined in Unicode at the time it > shipped. That actually came as a great surpris

Re: Ways to show Unicode contents on Windows?

On Fri, 19 Jul 2013 23:35:32 +0300 Eli Zaretskii wrote: > From: Peter Constable > IOW, the assertion that one cannot expect an OS shipped in > 2001 to support scripts that didn't exist at that time is simply > false. There's no technical problem here, only a managerial decision. If the Wikiped

RE: Ways to show Unicode contents on Windows?

Every Unicode code point will have some default behaviour in any text process on Windows. If those default behaviours happen to fit the character in question, then you should get the behaviour you want. But we don't service Windows for each UCD update. Also, not every text process relies solely

Re: What does one do if the encoding is unknown and all you have is a sequence of bytes?

On Jul 19, 2013, at 12:42 PM, Mark Davis ☕ wrote: > Popping up a level. > > ICU (and some other libraries) have heuristic encoding detection, that will > take a sequence of bytes and come up with a likely encoding id. However, the ICU encoding detection typically requires more than 4 bytes (

RE: Ways to show Unicode contents on Windows?

Not everything that is technically possible makes good sense. My comments clearly were not framed solely in terms of what is technically possible. Peter -Original Message- From: Eli Zaretskii [mailto:e...@gnu.org] Sent: Friday, July 19, 2013 1:36 PM To: Peter Constable Cc: nospam-ab..

Re: Ways to show Unicode contents on Windows?

> From: Peter Constable > CC: "nospam-ab...@ilyaz.org" , "unicode@unicode.org" > > Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 15:15:51 + > > The largest share of customers, by far, wouldn't want us to add new features > to XP since that would entail risks of new bugs, application compatibility > regress

Re: What does one do if the encoding is unknown and all you have is a sequence of bytes?

On 07/19/2013 11:51 AM, Costello, Roger L. wrote: Hi Folks, Suppose that these hex bytes: C3 83 C2 B1 show up in a message and the message contains no hint what its encoding is. Perhaps it is 8859-1, in which case the message consists of four 1-byte characters: C3 = Ã 83 = the “no b

Re: Ways to show Unicode contents on Windows?

> From: Peter Constable > CC: "nospam-ab...@ilyaz.org" , > "unicode@unicode.org" > > Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 19:49:10 + > > I'm sorry that Microsoft's approach to product servicing does not meet your > expectations. It is what it is, however. That's not the issue here. The is

RE: What does one do if the encoding is unknown and all you have is a sequence of bytes?

> Suppose that these hex bytes: > > C3 83 C2 B1 > > show up in a message and the message contains no hint what its encoding is. > > Perhaps it is 8859-1, in which case the message consists of four 1-byte > characters: > > C3 = Ã > 83 = the “no break here” character > C2 = Â > B1 = ± >

What does one do if the encoding is unknown and all you have is a sequence of bytes?

Hi Folks, Suppose that these hex bytes: C3 83 C2 B1 show up in a message and the message contains no hint what its encoding is. Perhaps it is 8859-1, in which case the message consists of four 1-byte characters: C3 = Ã 83 = the “no break here” character C2 = Â B1 = ± Perhaps it is

RE: Ways to show Unicode contents on Windows?

The word "support" has different meanings in the software industry. In some contexts, it has a very restrictive meaning: "application X does not support OS version Y" (or vice versa) doesn't just mean the respective vendors don't offer technical support. It usually means the application will not ru

RE: Ways to show Unicode contents on Windows?

The largest share of customers, by far, wouldn't want us to add new features to XP since that would entail risks of new bugs, application compatibility regressions, and frequent need to retrain users. If Ford or BMW were continuously retrofitting design changes to vehicles in use, the mechanics,

RE: Ways to show Unicode contents on Windows?

"... it is becoming more difficult to develop solutions for lesser used languages." Well, starting in Windows 8 the languages you can configure for input number in the thousands, being limited only by text display capabilities. E.g., in Windows 8 you could configure Dyirbal as one of your langu

Re: Ways to show Unicode contents on Windows?

Although writing an IME from scratch is beyond the skill set of a few of us. Although there are text services framework table based IMEs. Although I did here a romour that support for those may disappear. Not sure if that is true or not. But since Windows 8, it has become even more difficult to t

Re: symbols/codepoints for necessity and possibility in modal logic

Hi Jörg, Thanks for the info! U+25C7 WHITE DIAMOND is the best choice I'm with you in that for now I'll go with ⟨◻ (U+25FB), ◇ (U+25C7)⟩ as the pair of choice, pending further decisions; see also what I'm writing further down. Or objections from experts stating that the symbol properties

Aw: Re: symbols/codepoints for necessity and possibility in modal logic

I think,   U+25C7 WHITE DIAMOND is the best choice, followed by U+27E1 WHITE CONCAVE-SIDED DIAMOND • never (modal operator)   The latter has a more fancy shape and might not be the one the reader expects. As a plus, it comes also with versions having right and left ticks, needed in some exte

Re: symbols/codepoints for necessity and possibility in modal logic

Why not contact the relevant publishers and find out what they are using? "Why not contact the relevant governments and find out what they're using in order to solve /_*all*_/ encoding issues for /_*all*_/ languages and writing systems within a day?" :-) Publishers use metal type (or various

Re: symbols/codepoints for necessity and possibility in modal logic

Unicode cannot be the arbiter of mathematical (or other) notation, but, within limits, you could ask for some annotations if this would help ensure that there's some uniformity in how people pick symbols for certain purposes. Why not contact the relevant publishers and find out what they are u

Re: symbols/codepoints for necessity and possibility in modal logic

What is wrong with using DIAMOND OPERATOR? "wrong" is strong wording and goes beyond what I suggested or implied, but it's not clear to a user of Unicode that it's the right fit either. There are a couple of indicators factoring in: * The charts mention modal logic in conjunction with ◻ (U+

Re: Ways to show Unicode contents on Windows?

On Thu, 18 Jul 2013 17:11:45 -0700 Ilya Zakharevich wrote: > Just in case: do you realize that out-of-BMP must be specified via > LIGATURES section? Yes, for 'character' read UTF-16 code element. Even worse, you can't use dead keys outside the BMP, which prevents one using MSKLC for typing in n

Re: Ways to show Unicode contents on Windows?

> From: Peter Constable > Date: Fri, 19 Jul 2013 03:19:44 + > > You can't expect an OS like Windows XP to support Old Italic characters that > weren't even defined in Unicode at the time it shipped. In all fairness, I think you forget the regular OS updates. I have XP SP3 installed on one

Re: symbols/codepoints for necessity and possibility in modal logic

What is wrong with using DIAMOND OPERATOR? A./ On 7/18/2013 8:27 PM, Stephan Stiller wrote: Hi all, Modal logic uses a "box" and a "diamond" (this is how they're informally called) as operators (accepting one formula and returning another) to denote necessity and possibility, resp. Older tex