On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 1:26 PM, Stephan Stiller
stephan.stil...@gmail.comwrote:
Though some confusion as what other questions are being discussed here.
I think I misused the expression folding at some point. But the original
query explicitly asked about do[ing] traditional to simplified
On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 4:18 PM, Stephan Stiller
stephan.stil...@gmail.comwrote:
Some Cantonese characters, as for Sawndip by their construction tend to
be ambiguous which often means 'something which sounds like this known
character, and therefore the meaning must be learned.
Many
On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 5:56 PM, Stephan Stiller
stephan.stil...@gmail.comwrote:
For me non-standardized' means there is not one recognized standard,
this does not mean that things are completely unstable, nor that there are
no traditions of what character is used for what word that have
On Sun, Jun 9, 2013 at 7:29 PM, Stephan Stiller
stephan.stil...@gmail.comwrote:
The way the Cheung-Bauer list was compiled certainly hard to see how most
of the characters would be in widely known.
I'd need to look at CB again for accurate numbers, but to some extent
it's simply because
basis.
Regards
John Knightley
Stephan
On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 4:02 PM, Stephan Stiller
stephan.stil...@gmail.comwrote:
http://www.unicode.org/**reports/tr38/http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr38/does
a good summary of the possibilities.
Which and where?
Section 3.7.1 Simplified and Traditional Chinese Variants talks about
On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 4:05 PM, Stephan Stiller
stephan.stil...@gmail.comwrote:
The situation also tends to be complex once one steps putside of
Putonghua.
Given that the situation there is a lack of standardization (and a lack of
tables laying out variant spellings), I don't think
On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 9:00 PM, Stephan Stiller
stephan.stil...@gmail.comwrote:
I.
Which and where?
Section 3.7.1 Simplified and Traditional Chinese Variants talks about
converting between Simplified and Traditional Chinese.
You wrote this
http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr38/
which if
present which it probably would good to fold in but these are not in the
scope of UniHan.
Regards
John Knightley
On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 4:00 AM, Stephan Stiller
stephan.stil...@gmail.comwrote:
Hi John,
This is one of those questions that I've been wondering about as well ...
my guess
But is how do we know whether the bug is there all the time!
On Fri, Mar 22, 2013 at 4:45 PM, Stephane Bortzmeyer bortzme...@nic.fr wrote:
This one is incredible:
https://bugzilla.redhat.com/show_bug.cgi?id=922433
On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 6:18 PM, Michael Everson ever...@evertype.com wrote:
On 2 Mar 2013, at 23:24, Peter Constable peter...@microsoft.com wrote:
Well, I suppose it's long enough since Klingon was invented that it's
conceivable there are people that grew up as in homes with dedicated Klingon
On Sun, Mar 3, 2013 at 8:12 PM, Michael Everson ever...@evertype.com wrote:
On 3 Mar 2013, at 12:06, john knightley john.knight...@gmail.com wrote:
When translating from one language to another there are always some words
and expressions for which there exists no exact equivalents.
Yes
Whilst using the PUA is far from perfect at the end of the day it is
better than the alternative of not using the PUA.
Regards
John
On 10 Nov 2012 17:37, William_J_G Overington wjgo_10...@btinternet.com
wrote:
On Thursday 8 November 2012, Philippe Verdy verd...@wanadoo.fr wrote:
2012/11/8
One key criteris for inclusion in Unicode is that a character or symbol be
in circulation. Whether these are hand written, printed or electronic. If
one creates a new a new character then one first must get others to use it,
this takes time.
John
On 8 Nov 2012 14:57, William_J_G Overington
Sad to say this seems to be close to the norm for all to many large
organizations where if it isn't in the 1990's version of the Times Roman
font then it's out.
John
On 3 Oct 2012 00:26, Doug Ewell d...@ewellic.org wrote:
The United Nations Economic Commission for Europe (UNECE) has released a
On Mon, Feb 6, 2012 at 10:23 PM, Larson, Timothy E. telar...@west.comwrote:
FWIW, some of us consider OFL to be non-free (it doesn't allow sale
alone), so won't install fonts using it at all.
Could you explain this further? This is the first I've heard of this
issue.
Here the write
Yesterday I contacted the person claiming to be James Kass the maker of the
Code2000 series of fonts. The person using the account clearly is not James
Kass the maker of the font. When asked questions he restricts himself to
answers that can be found by a google search and when asked further
17 matches
Mail list logo
