Re: Another take on the English Apostrophe in Unicode

kDavis☕️" , "DougEwell" > Copie à : "TedClancy" , "UnicodeMailingList" > Objet : Re: Another take on the English Apostrophe in Unicode > > > On Tue, Jun 16, Mark Davis ☕️ wrote: > And, Marcel, while you are at it, this is getting tire

Re: Another take on the English Apostrophe in Unicode

On Tue, Jun 16, Mark Davis ☕️ wrote: > And, Marcel, while you are at it, this is getting tiresome. > Please find some other place to vent about events you know very little about; > the internet is full of them. Dear Mark, I understand (a little) that I'm tiresome. Please consider nevertheless

Re: Another take on the English Apostrophe in Unicode

bly in French, and to start with the single quotes.   Marcel > Message du 16/06/15 21:08 > De : "Philippe Verdy" > A : "Marcel Schneider" > Copie à : "Doug Ewell" , "Unicode Mailing List" > Objet : Re: Another take on the English Apostrop

Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

On Mon, Jun 16, 2015, "Richard Wordingham" wrote: > I don't know if you have the wrong link for MSKLC, but that link > claims it is only 'supported' up to Vista. That's not much of an > invitation! I do know that MSKLC works on Windows 7, and its output > there is appropriate for Windows 7, gener

Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

On Mon, 15 Jun 2015 08:40:57 +0200 (CEST) Marcel Schneider wrote: > ...while in the meantime, in obliging > anticipation, the worldʼs biggest software company stays inviting us > to feel free to customise our keyboard with a free tool for free > download at > http://www.microsoft.com/en-us/downlo

Re: Another take on the English Apostrophe in Unicode

When ISO 8859-1 was designed (in fact in an early version by Digital for its own version of Unix), allowing a bijective compatibility with 8-bit EBCDIC and its C1 controls was still a priority. Microsoft abandoned its own develomment of Unix to develop DOS and extend it with Windows in parallel of

Re: Another take on the English Apostrophe in Unicode

And, Marcel, while you are at it, this is getting tiresome. Please find some other place to vent about events you know very little about; the internet is full of them. Mark Mark *— Il meglio è l’inimico del bene —* On Tue, Jun 16, 2015 at 7:33 PM, Doug Ewell w

RE: Another take on the English Apostrophe in Unicode

Marcel Schneider wrote: > That's to despise people, that's to spit at their face. You know what? If you want to use U+02BC as an English apostrophe, go ahead and use it. Nobody's stopping you really. Not Unicode, not Microsoft, not ISO. I do wish we could put an end to all the accusations of ma

Re: Another take on the English Apostrophe in Unicode

> Message du 16/06/15 19:12 > De : "Marcel Schneider" > A : "Doug Ewell" > Copie à : "Unicode Mailing List" > Objet : Re: Another take on the English Apostrophe in Unicode > > > On Mon, Jun 15, 2015, 17:12, Doug Ewell wrote: > Marce

Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

On Sat, Jun 13, 2015, Mark Davis wrote: > In particular, I see no need to change our recommendation on the character > used > in contractions for English and many other languages (U+2019). Similarly, we > wouldn't > recommend use of anything but the colon for marking abbreviations in Swedish,

Re: Another take on the English Apostrophe in Unicode

On Mon, Jun 15, 2015, Doug Ewell wrote: > Marcel Schneider wrote: > >> A free tool, the Microsoft Keyboard Layout Creator, allows every user >> to add U+02BC on his preferred keyboard layout > I use John Cowan's Moby Latin keyboard, built with MSKLC, which is 100% > compatible with the AltGr-les

Re: Another take on the English Apostrophe in Unicode

On Mon, Jun 15, Philippe Verdy wrote: > But I think that keyboard should all have a dedicated Kana key to easily map > additional groups without sacrificing other shift keys > on the last row: keyboards really don't need two windows keys and so the > space bar can remain with a cumfortable wid

Re: Another take on the English Apostrophe in Unicode

On Mon, Jun 15, 2015, 17:12, Doug Ewell wrote: > Marcel Schneider wrote: [...] >> Microsoft’s choice of mashing up apostrophe and close-quote to end up >> with an unprocessable hybrid was wrong. Very wrong. > Windows-1252 and the other Windows code pages were developed during the > 1980s, before

Re: Another take on the English Apostrophe in Unicode

conform in any way to the common secondary layout of either > 9995-3:2002 or 9995-3:2010. For example, there is no ohm sign on US > International in any group or level, either at D01 (2002) or D02 (2010). > Perhaps we are not talking about the same thing when we say "conforms to > ISO/IEC

Re: Another take on the English Apostrophe in Unicode

2015-06-15 16:49 GMT+02:00 Marcel Schneider : > It's indeed very useful to keep two Control modifiers. Because the > modifiers at the left and right border of the block are acted with the > little finger and should thus be symetrical. This does not apply to the Alt > keys and other keys more or l

Re: Another take on the English Apostrophe in Unicode

Marcel Schneider wrote: > A free tool, the Microsoft Keyboard Layout Creator, allows every user > to add U+02BC on his preferred keyboard layout I use John Cowan's Moby Latin keyboard, built with MSKLC, which is 100% compatible with the AltGr-less US keyboard and supports almost 900 other charac

Re: Another take on the English Apostrophe in Unicode

On Fri, Jun 12, 2015, Philippe Verdy wrote: > These are application shortcuts, but these modifier keys combinations are > used with base function keys (F1...F12), not with keys on the alphanumeric > parts of the keyboard. So there's no conflict. Thank you for your advice. It'll be very useful.

Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

2015-06-15 15:20 GMT+02:00 QSJN 4 UKR : > By the way, about smart quotes. I am using that for long time. My > keyboard layout generates two characters on one key-press (so I have > to enter [«»][←]{sth}[→] instead of [«]{sth}[»]). It's not that good, > You could generate three keystrokes [«][»][←

Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

On Tue Mar 26 2002 - 10:01:43 EST, Mark Davis ☕️ wrote: http://www.unicode.org/mail-arch/unicode-ml/y2002-m03/0598.html > Apostrophe, hyphen, and various other puncutation by default continue > a word, but this behavior may be overriden on a per-language basis. > Heuristics or more sophisticated

Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

By the way, about smart quotes. I am using that for long time. My keyboard layout generates two characters on one key-press (so I have to enter [«»][←]{sth}[→] instead of [«]{sth}[»]). It's not that good, but I'm not afraid neither to lose quotation marks or parentheses nor become a victim of artif

Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 10:19 AM, Mark Davis ☕️ wrote: > On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 9:17 AM, Marcel Schneider wrote: >> When we take the topic down again from linguistics to the core mission of >> Unicode, that is character encoding and text processing standardisation, >> ellipsis and Swedish ab

Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

On Mon, Jun 15, 2015 at 9:17 AM, Marcel Schneider wrote: > When we take the topic down again from linguistics to the core mission of > Unicode, that is character encoding and text processing standardisation, > ellipsis and Swedish abbreviation colon differ from the single closing > quotation mark

Re: Another take on the English Apostrophe in Unicode

2015-06-15 8:23 GMT+02:00 Marcel Schneider : > On Fri, Jun 12, 2015, Philippe Verdy wrote: > Even the Language bar uses the upper row to define shortcuts with Control, > Shift+Control, Shift+Alt to switch between keyboard layouts, which are > prioritized. > These are application shortcuts, but th

Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

rcel Schneider     > Message du 13/06/15 17:36 > De : "Mark Davis ☕️" > A : "Peter Constable" > Copie à : "verd...@wanadoo.fr" , "Kalvesmaki, Joel" , "Unicode Mailing List" > Objet : Re: Another take on the English apostrophe i

Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

On Thu, Jun 11, 2015, Philippe Verdy wrote: > The ASCII punctuations have been ovveriden for a lot of different roles. > There's simply no way to map them to a category that matches their semantic > role. So the ASCII hyphen and apostrophe-quote can only be given a very weak > category that ju

Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

At the following URL, a forum page illustrates the way users struggle since a decade (and more) against the chaotic confusion Microsoft perpetuated despite of Unicode, forcing the Committee to adopt its short views: http://painintheenglish.com/case/383 Please note Persephoneʼs workaround, which

Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

On Wed, Jun 10, 2015, Ted Clancy wrote: > The idea that words with apostrophes aren't valid words is a regrettable myth > that exists in English, > which has repeatedly led to the apostrophe being an afterthought in > computing, leading to situations like this one. [...] > I imagine spell-ch

Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

On Fri, June 5, William_J_G Overington wrote: > I replied: >> Would it be possible to have wordprocessing software where one >> uses CONTROL APOSTROPHE for U+2019 and CONTROL SHIFT APOSTROPHE for U+02BC >> for input [...] > I am wondering whether some existing software packages > might be ab

Re: Another take on the English Apostrophe in Unicode

On Fri, Jun 12, 2015, Philippe Verdy wrote: > 2015-06-12 17:02 GMT+02:00 Marcel Schneider : >>> Would it be possible to have wordprocessing software where one uses >>> CONTROL APOSTROPHE for U+2019 and CONTROL SHIFT APOSTROPHE for U+02BC >> CONTROL and CONTROL+SHIFT cannot work on French keyb

Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

On Sat, Jun 13, 2015 at 5:10 PM, Peter Constable wrote: > When it comes to orthography, the notion of what comprise words of a > language is generally pure convention. That’s because there isn’t any > single *_linguistic_ *definition of word that gives the same answer when > phonological vs. morp

RE: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

...@gmail.com] On Behalf Of Philippe Verdy Sent: Saturday, June 13, 2015 12:03 AM To: Peter Constable Cc: Kalvesmaki, Joel; Unicode Mailing List Subject: Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode I disagree: U+02BC already qualifies as a letter (even if it is not specific to the Latin

Re: Another take on the English Apostrophe in Unicode

On June 3, 2015, Ted Clancy wrote: > https://tedclancy.wordpress.com/2015/06/03/which-unicode-character-should-represent-the-english-apostrophe-and-why-the-unicode-committee-is-very-wrong/ I wish to thank you personally for having brought up this issue, as well as Mr Grosshans for having post

Re: Another take on the English Apostrophe in Unicode

On Sun, Jul 18, 1999, Markus Kuhn wrote: > http://www.unicode.org/mail-arch/unicode-ml/Archives-Old/UML017/0557.html > I addition, I feel that the current ISO 8859 oriented national keyboard > standards are not adequate for modern Unicode-era word processing > practices, as they put obsolete typ

Another take on the English Apostrophe in Unicode

On Fri, Jun 5, 2015, David Starner wrote: > On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 12:16 AM Leo Broukhis wrote: >> I agree that conflating apostrophes and quotes is a source of >> problems, however, existence of the MODIFIER LETTER [same glyph as >> used for English contractions] in Unicode is a coincidence wh

Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

:28 GMT+02:00 Peter Constable : > Nice article, as I recall. (Been a long time.) > > > Peter > > -Original Message- > From: Unicode [mailto:unicode-boun...@unicode.org] On Behalf Of > Kalvesmaki, Joel > Sent: Friday, June 5, 2015 7:27 AM > To: Unicode Mailing

RE: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

Nice article, as I recall. (Been a long time.) Peter -Original Message- From: Unicode [mailto:unicode-boun...@unicode.org] On Behalf Of Kalvesmaki, Joel Sent: Friday, June 5, 2015 7:27 AM To: Unicode Mailing List Subject: Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode I don&#

Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

I don't agree with this Grévisse definition (and I'm not alone, other grammarians and dictionaries don't follow Grévisse, and even the French Academy disagrees). May be this is a form of composition but the correct term is nothz that it create a new word, it just means that words take new semantic

Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

On 6/10/2015 9:37 PM, Philippe Verdy wrote: The French "pomme de terre" ("potato" in English, French vulgar synonym : "patate") is a single lemma in dictionaries, but is still 3 separate words (only the first one takes the plural mark), it is

Re: Another take on the English Apostrophe in Unicode

2015-06-12 17:02 GMT+02:00 Marcel Schneider : > >> Would it be possible to have wordprocessing software where one uses > >> CONTROL APOSTROPHE for U+2019 and CONTROL SHIFT APOSTROPHE for U+02BC > > CONTROL and CONTROL+SHIFT cannot work on French keyboards where the > existing ASCII apostrophe is o

Another take on the English Apostrophe in Unicode

On Fri, June 5, William_J_G Overington wrote: > Markus Scherer wrote: >>> How are normal users supposed to find both U+2019 and U+02BC on their >>> keyboards, and how are they supposed to deal with incorrect usage? > I replied: >> Would it be possible to have wordprocessing software where one

Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 2:38 PM Markus Scherer wrote: > Confusion between apostrophe and quoting -- > blame the scribe who came up with the ambiguous use, > not the people who gave it a number. There’s a lot of confusion in writing, especially since this job was done on typewriters, where com

Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

2015-06-11 20:46 GMT+02:00 Bill Poser : > I agree with the recommendation of U+02BC. However, it is in fact rarely > used because most of the people who write these languages or create > supporting infrastructure are unawre of such issues. > > A small point: it isn't always the spacing diacritic t

Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

I agree with the recommendation of U+02BC. However, it is in fact rarely used because most of the people who write these languages or create supporting infrastructure are unawre of such issues. A small point: it isn't always the spacing diacritic that is used. In some languages, e.g. Halkomelem, p

Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

Also used in the Breton trigram c’h (considered as a single letter of the Breton alphabet, but actually entered as two letters with a diacritic-like apostrophe in the middle (which in this case is still not a letter of the alphabet...): the trigram c’h is distinct from the digram ch. Breton **also*

Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

To add a factor that I think hasn't been mentioned, there are languages in which apostrophe is used both as a letter by itself and as part of a complex letter. Most of the native languages of British Columbia write glottalized consonants as C+', e.g. for an ejective alveolar stop, and many use apo

Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

On Thu, Jun 11, 2015 at 1:17 AM, Philippe Verdy wrote: > The ASCII punctuations have been ovveriden for a lot of different roles. > There's simply no way to map them to a category that matches their semantic > role. [...] "Pd" (dash) is then appropriate for the ASCII hyphen-minus. > I agree, but

Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

The ASCII punctuations have been ovveriden for a lot of different roles. There's simply no way to map them to a category that matches their semantic role. So the ASCII hyphen and apostrophe-quote can only be given a very weak category that just exhibit their visual role. "Pd" (dash) is then appropr

Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

The French "pomme de terre" ("potato" in English, French vulgar synonym : "patate") is a single lemma in dictionaries, but is still 3 separate words (only the first one takes the plural mark), it is not considered a "nom composé" (so there's no hyphens). And they are separated by standard spaces (

Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

On 4/Jun/2015 19:01, Leo Broukhis wrote: > > Along the same lines, we might need a MODIFIER LETTER HYPHEN, because, for > example, the work ack-ack isn't decomposable into words, or even > morphemes, > "ack" and "ack". > I do think that U+2010 (HYPHEN) is miscategorised. I think it should have Gene

Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

On 4/Jun/2015 14:34 PM, Markus Scherer wrote: > > Looks all wrong to me. > Hi, Markus. I'm the guy who wrote the blog post. I'll respond to your points below. > You can't use simple regular expressions to find word boundaries. That's > why we have UAX #29. > And UAX #29 doesn't work for words

Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

On 6/5/2015 10:29 AM, John D. Burger wrote: Linguistically, "don't" and friends pass all the diagnostics that indicate they're single words. If I am not mistaken, the french "pomme de terre" also passes the diagnostics. So we need a new space character. Eric.

Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

> On Jun 4, 2015, at 17:34 , Markus Scherer wrote: > > Looks all wrong to me. > > "don’t" is a contraction of two words, it is not one word. Yes it is. Is "keyboard" two words? How about "newspaper"? If "don't" is two words, please tell me what two words make up "won't"? (Hint, neither of th

Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

QSJN 4 UKR wrote: > And programmers say "That's wrong! We can't understand that". Just are > you so stupid if you can't! You know, we really aren't all like that. Some of us actually try to meet user needs. -- Doug Ewell | http://ewellic.org | Thornton, CO 🇺🇸

Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

I don’t have a particular position staked out. But to this discussion should be added the very interesting work done by Zwicky and Pullum arguing that the apostrophe is the 27th letter of the Latin alphabet. Neither U+2019 nor U+02BC would satisfy that position. See: Zwicky and Pullum 1983 Zwic

Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 2:43 AM QSJN 4 UKR wrote: > The conflict is between linguists and programmers. No, it's not. > Yes it is ambiguous! > It is. It just is! Linguists say "It is. We see that. We know that". > "Now you programmers find some way to deal with that so you can produce useful c

Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

Markus Scherer wrote: >> How are normal users supposed to find both U+2019 and U+02BC on their >> keyboards, and how are they supposed to deal with incorrect usage? I replied: > Would it be possible to have wordprocessing software where one uses CONTROL > APOSTROPHE for U+2019 and CONTROL SHIFT A

Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

On Fri, Jun 5, 2015 at 12:16 AM Leo Broukhis wrote: > I agree that conflating apostrophes and quotes is a source of > problems, however, existence of the MODIFIER LETTER [same glyph as > used for English contractions] in Unicode is a coincidence which > should not have an effect on usage of apost

Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

Markus Scherer wrote: > How are normal users supposed to find both U+2019 and U+02BC on their > keyboards, and how are they supposed to deal with incorrect usage? Would it be possible to have wordprocessing software where one uses CONTROL APOSTROPHE for U+2019 and CONTROL SHIFT APOSTROPHE for U+0

Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

The conflict is between linguists and programmers. In plain text apostrophe is a punctuation used instead letters (unreadable, one or more) or as separator for avoid connecting letters into ligature or syllable, between parts of composite word as well as inside the simple word, or finally, as quota

Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

> But the point was that treating hyphens as parts of words is not generally a > wrong thing. That brings us back to my original question: where's MODIFIER LETTER HYPHEN, then? A word is a sequence of letters, isn't it? :) I agree that conflating apostrophes and quotes is a source of problems, h

Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

On June 4, 2015, at 11:01 PM, Leo Broukhis wrote: > > >On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 9:25 PM, David Starner wrote: > >Hyphens generally make multiple words into one anyway. There's not really >multiple hyphens the way there's separate quotes and apostrophes. > >Generally, but not always, just as apo

Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 9:25 PM, David Starner wrote: > Hyphens generally make multiple words into one anyway. There's not really > multiple hyphens the way there's separate quotes and apostrophes. > Generally, but not always, just as apostrophes aren't always at a contracted word boundary. There

Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

Hyphens generally make multiple words into one anyway. There's not really multiple hyphens the way there's separate quotes and apostrophes. On 7:01pm, Thu, Jun 4, 2015 Leo Broukhis wrote: > Along the same lines, we might need a MODIFIER LETTER HYPHEN, because, for > example, the work ack-ack isn

Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

Along the same lines, we might need a MODIFIER LETTER HYPHEN, because, for example, the work ack-ack isn't decomposable into words, or even morphemes, "ack" and "ack". Leo On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 6:31 PM, David Starner wrote: > On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 2:38 PM Markus Scherer > wrote: > >> "don’t"

Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

On Thu, Jun 4, 2015 at 2:38 PM Markus Scherer wrote: > "don’t" is a contraction of two words, it is not one word. > But as he points out, it's not a contraction of don and t; it is, at best, a contraction of do and n't. It's eliding, not punctuating. In the comments, he also brings up the exampl

Re: Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

Looks all wrong to me. "don’t" is a contraction of two words, it is not one word. English is taught as that squiggle being punctuation, not a letter. (Unlike, say, the Hawaiʻian ʻOkina .) You can't use simple regular expressions to find word boundaries.

Another take on the English apostrophe in Unicode

An interesting argument for U+02BC MODIFIER LETTER APOSTROPHE as English apostrophe : https://tedclancy.wordpress.com/2015/06/03/which-unicode-character-should-represent-the-english-apostrophe-and-why-the-unicode-committee-is-very-wrong/ Frédéric