On 23 Jul 2015, at 18:00, Doug Ewell wrote:
> What you have discovered
Alas, I'd better done a search on the internet prior to solliciting some new
advice and feedback, with respect to other peoples' time. Indeed I've
"discovered" (quotation) that for myself, but as I learned *after* my las
On 23 Jul 2015, at 22;35, Richard Wordingham wrote:
> > IMHO it would be hard to input fractions in nut style while using
> > plain text or normal formatting, at the extent that we need the
> > special Maths applications we know, from LibreOffice as far as I am
> > concerned. But that isn't plai
The Plain text custom fraction input issue IMHO has so far been resolved at a
certain level and to some extent. Itʼs a bit complicated for me to explain.
As you already know, Iʼm still lacking the reflex of doing first a search on
the internet. Only after my last yesterdayʼs e-mail I did and
Sorry, I'd forgotten to add two Addressees who had responded on this thread.
The Plain text custom fraction input issue IMHO has so far been resolved at a
certain level and to some extent. Itʼs a bit complicated for me to explain.
As you already know, Iʼm still lacking the reflex of doi
Le 23/07/2015 20:42, Richard Wordingham a écrit :
On Thu, 23 Jul 2015 12:00:06 +0200
Frédéric Grosshans wrote:
Le 23/07/2015 00:54, Richard Wordingham a écrit :
Which means that Ancient Egyptian hieroglyphs are unencoded! Their
default direction is right-to-left, but that's only the start of
On Thu, 23 Jul 2015 19:42:50 +0100
Richard Wordingham wrote:
> If the hieroglyphs had had the BidiMirrored property corrected to Yes,
> one could have had, in plain text, once fonts had caught up:
>
> for nṯr in normal left-to-right
> text FORMATTING> for nṯr in retrograde left-to-right text
On 7/24/2015 2:59 AM, Frédéric Grosshans wrote:
Is that better ? Once again, I agree that forbidding ancient Egyptian
to be mirrored when “stupid and dangerous”
I can see that this thread seems to have gone off the rails a bit.
The Unicode Standard does not forbid Egyptian hieroglyphs from
On 7/24/2015 2:59 AM, Frédéric Grosshans wrote:
Let me rephrase my remark in a less “stupid and dangerous” way.
If a LTR character has the BidiMirrored=No property, it may either
be mirrored or not when typeset in RTL, depending on other factors.
Specifically, the BidiMirrored property
Marcel Schneider wrote:
> Representing fractions as U+2044 is known as a compatibility mapping,
> equally like representing a superscript as , while (I go on checking
> my knowledge...) representing a precomposed diacriticized letter as is
> known as a decomposition mapping. The difference betwee
On Fri, 24 Jul 2015 09:28:05 -0700
Ken Whistler wrote:
> First there is a general issue of general mirroring of body text for
> some ancient scripts, which in paleographic contexts often followed
> conventions (no longer seen, except in rare edge cases) of having the
> direction of glyph orientat
On Fri, 24 Jul 2015 10:09:18 -0700
Asmus Freytag wrote:
> On 7/24/2015 2:59 AM, Frédéric Grosshans wrote:
> > Let me rephrase my remark in a less “stupid and dangerous” way.
> >
> >If a LTR character has the BidiMirrored=No property, it may
> > either be mirrored or not when typeset in RTL, d
11 matches
Mail list logo
