> Edward Cherlin <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Chinese scholar-officials in training used to practice writing the
> 3000 Character Classic over and over and over...and yes, it contained
> 3000 distinct characters once each.
What is this book? The Thousand Character Classic is fa
I've been away in China. Since this question hasn't been answered
after several weeks, I'll add my « (er jiao--2.5 cents).
At 09:31 -0800 2000/10/18, James E. Agenbroad wrote:
>On Wed, 18 Oct 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> Jon Babcock wrote:
>> > It seems to me that if not for that, how
On Wed, 18 Oct 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Jon Babcock wrote:
> > It seems to me that if not for that, how could anyone
> > make a Chinese font? Who is going to sit down and
> > draw a *myriad* or more characters? Since elements
> > recur, this reduces the amount of labour required
> > greatl
Jon Babcock wrote:
> BTW, Marco, as near as I can recall, the above quotation in not from
> me.
Did it again! Shame on me! Sorry!
_ Marco
On Wed, 18 Oct 2000 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Jon Babcock wrote:
> > It seems to me that if not for that, how could anyone
> > make a Chinese font? Who is going to sit down and
> > draw a *myriad* or more characters? Since elements
> > recur, this reduces the amount of labour required
> > greatl
> "Marco" == Marco Cimarosti <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> Jon Babcock wrote:
>> It seems to me that if not for that, how could anyone make a
>> Chinese font? Who is going to sit down and draw a *myriad* or
>> more characters? Since elements recur, this reduces the amount
Jon Babcock wrote:
> It seems to me that if not for that, how could anyone
> make a Chinese font? Who is going to sit down and
> draw a *myriad* or more characters? Since elements
> recur, this reduces the amount of labour required
> greatly.
I too would have bet that all CJK foundries used some
Michael Everson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Speed is an issue, it seems. The two third-party Mac demos that use
> the Unicode keyboards under Mac OS 9 are very slow indeed.
and "Carl W. Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> responded:
> Windows NT has had this problem. However all Unicode applications
>
applications.
It is largely a chicken and egg issue.
Carl
-Original Message-
From: Michael Everson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, October 15, 2000 5:22 AM
To: Unicode List
Subject: RE: "Giga Character Set": Nothing but noise
Ar 18:30 -0800 2000-10-14, scríobh Doug Ewell:
Ar 18:30 -0800 2000-10-14, scríobh Doug Ewell:
>Yes, but 1500 times faster? I don't know if 11-Digit Boy was right
>about using Intercal, but their Unicode implementation must have been
>really slow.
Speed is an issue, it seems. The two third-party Mac demos that use the
Unicode keyboards under
It seems to me that if not for that, how could anyone
make a Chinese font? Who is going to sit down and
draw a *myriad* or more characters? Since elements
recur, this reduces the amount of labour required
greatly.
..
..
[OT] Are there any character-encoding schemes that
have CENTESIMAL DI
I see I was *doubly* "brief". Sorry for the duplicate message. Jon
--
Jon Babcock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
"Carl W. Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If you were to start all over again with no interest in
> compatibility with existing code pages, you could drop the preformed
> characters.
Since I've commented about the possibility of using a set of less than
2000 or so characters to represent all
"Carl W. Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If you were to start all over again with no interest in
> compatibility with existing code pages, you could drop the preformed
> characters.
Since I've commented about the possibility of using a set of less than
2000 or so characters to represent all
"Carl W. Brown" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> The problem with languages like Korean is that they are carrying a
> lot of history. Today with the newer font technology there is no
> reason to have preformed characters. If you were to start all over
> again with no interest in compatibility with
efficient to do
Chinese with 0 characters.
Hey with octal I can do everything with 8 characters or in binary with two.
Carl
-Original Message-
From: Doug Ewell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Friday, October 13, 2000 9:59 PM
To: Unicode List
Subject: Re: "Giga Character Set": Nothing
John Jenkins <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> Have we figured out yet what part of "Hamlet" the Giga people claim
>> cannot be encoded in Unicode?
>
> I had to do some head scratching on that one. I finally figured out
> that it was meant rhetorically. Would the inability to encode Hamlet
> be acc
17 matches
Mail list logo
