Vipul Garg wrote:
> I have downloaded your font chart for Devanagari, which is in
> the range from 0900 to 097F. I have also installed the Arial
> Unicode font supplied by Microsoft office XP suite. I found
> that not all characters are available for Devanagari. For
> example
Vipal Garg was asking why half characters were not included in Unicode
code charts and in his copy of Arial Unicode font.
More recent versions of Arial Unicode Do contain half characters etc.
for Devanagari.
As to the code charts, to answer this, you needed to explore the Unicode
web site a bit
Vipul Garg wrote:
> I have downloaded your font chart for Devanagari, which is in the range
> from 0900 to 097F. I have also installed the Arial Unicode font supplied
> by Microsoft office XP suite. I found that not all characters are
> available for Devanagari. For example letters s
Vipul Garg scripsit:
> I have downloaded your font chart for Devanagari, which is in the range
> from 0900 to 097F. I have also installed the Arial Unicode font supplied
> by Microsoft office XP suite. I found that not all characters are
> available for Devanagari. For example let
I have downloaded your font chart for Devanagari,
which is in the range from 0900 to 097F. I have also installed the Arial Unicode font
supplied by Microsoft office XP suite. I found that not all characters are
available for Devanagari. For example letters such as
Aadha KA, Aadha KHA
pport a site for collectors.>> I have set up a test page
for experimenting with the> Devanagari Unicodes at> this
address: http://victor.flaminio.com/aa_MySanskrit.html|| 1. This is what I want: Fungal ShamblerThis is NOT
what you want! :-)You say that you want a vocalic-L (U+090C,
de
Victor Campbell wrote:
> I'm looking for help with converting the text of a Sanskrit
> trading card to
> Unicode. I am not connected with the publisher of the card, just a
> programmer who helps support a site for collectors.
>
> I have set up a test page for experimenting
Unicode Community,
I'm looking for help with converting the text of a Sanskrit trading card to
Unicode. I am not connected with the publisher of the card, just a
programmer who helps support a site for collectors.
I have set up a test page for experimenting with the Devanagari Unicodes at
John Hudson wrote,
>
> >Uniscribe is a windows application and Microsoft tests it. Both
> >Microsoft and Apple provide tools to font developers which validate
> >fonts. TTF/OTF fonts have a rigid structure, if a font passes either
> >Microsoft's or Apple's font validators yet a system crashes
Hi,
There is a newsletter at http://tdil.mit.gov.in/news.htm, and the
more recent one
http://tdil.mit.gov.in/tdiljan2002.pdf ( This describes some font
standardization effort )
TDIL - Technology Development in Indian languages , a Ministry IT, GOI
supported project,
More info at http://tdil
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
"Michael (michka) Kaplan" wrote:
> From: "Michael Jansson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > Let's summarize what I have said:
> > 1 - My original posting on this thread clearly states that you need
> > to be careful when trying to use Uniscribe on Win9x, because it
> > i
At 11:04 AM 7/16/02 -0700, John Hudson wrote:
>To be fair to the poor system engineers,
To be honest to the system engineers, dealing with foreign data
without compromising system integrity is one of the basic
principles of system engineering. Crashes on fonts really
shouldn't be acceptable.
At 07:43 AM 16-07-02, James Kass wrote:
>Uniscribe is a windows application and Microsoft tests it. Both
>Microsoft and Apple provide tools to font developers which validate
>fonts. TTF/OTF fonts have a rigid structure, if a font passes either
>Microsoft's or Apple's font validators yet a syste
i's Raghu Devanagari typeface, which is
freely distributed by NCST.
http://rohini.ncst.ernet.in/indix/
Tiro Typeworks www.tiro.com
Vancouver, BC [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Language must belong to the Other -- to my linguistic community
as a whole -- before it can belong
> I don't think you will be able to convince anyone that the original
> version of Windows 95 that you are using is a stable platform. I
> wouldn't agree at least, and I wrote parts of it.
So if I'm using an already-unstable platform (which is true, no argument
there), and Uniscribe has improved
> Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 4:32 PM
> To: Michael Jansson; 'Michael (michka) Kaplan'
> Cc: Unicode List
> Subject: Re: Unicode Devanagari Font in Mozilla
>
>
> Michael Jansson wrote:
>
> > Giving advice to people that they should go ahead and update th
> > Am I
> > badmouthing anyone?
> >
>
> Perhaps. Is it badmouthing someone to call them unethical
> for offering
> users instructions on how they can compute in their own language on
> their older systems?
>
> Best regards,
>
> James Kass.
It was not my intent to offend anyone and I do apo
Michael Jansson wrote:
> Giving advice to people that they should go ahead and update their
> Win9x machines with Uniscribe is plain unethical. It's not tested on
> Win9x. There are known issues when doing that. Telling people to
> download and install fonts, that may or may not have been tested
Michael Jansson wrote,
> ... People may as easily fail to
> update a Win9x system with Uniscribe and a 23KB font as they would with a
> 23MB font.
True.
> The amount of support needed to sort out these users would still
> be the same.
>
Also true. One FAQ page with brief instructions ought
From: "Michael Jansson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I'm not arguing that you can not update one Win9x machine to
> show Tamil correctly. I'm arguing that you should not advice
> companies to tell a million web users to do that on a broad basis.
> You need test coverage, support, etc before doing that.
Michael Jansson wrote,
> > Code2000 is OpenType. Don't know about Code 2000.
>
> Ooops. Sorry about the typo.
>
That's OK. Actually, Michael Kaplan put the space in there and you
just picked it up.
I'm more concerned with the misinformation than the typo. It's
happened a couple of times whe
> Michael (michka) Kaplan wrote:
> (a) ignore the smallest of the two fonts
> (b) ignore the fact that these are EXAMPLES and that there
> may be others
(Sigh...) Size is not the main or only issue. People may as easily fail to
update a Win9x system with Uniscribe and a 23KB font as they would w
> James Kass wrote:
> > A few details; You can not use neither Arial Unicode MS nor
> > Code 2000 to
>
> Code2000 is OpenType. Don't know about Code 2000.
Ooops. Sorry about the typo.
> Most TrueType and OpenType fonts are pure Unicode fonts and have
> been all along. Font specs say that ISO
From: "Michael Jansson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> OK, I managed to ensure that with my own Win9x machine.
> How do I ensure that
Amzing how I give two fonts that each support a large subrange of Unicode,
and then for the sake of disproving my point, you choose to
(a) ignore the smallest of the tw
> James Kass:
> This is a new one. Is this documented?
There is a KB (I think!?). It's easy enough to reproduce as well. Install
Latha and have a look at MS's web fonts demo site. (See John Hudson previous
mail on this list as well.)
>
> There are Indic fonts without Latin coverage. The solut
> Kind of endearing, we all love our own technologies.
> Sometimes you do go a
> bit too far, though. I think your products are pretty
> awesome, enough so
> that you can allow other products their right to be as good
> as they are. :-)
Actually, I'm probably suffering from a different ailment
From: "Michael Jansson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > James Kass wrote:
> > The best way to render a Devanagari page is with Unicode encoding
> > and smart font technology. With an up-to-date version of the
> > Uniscribe software installed, Devanagari can be p
Michael Jansson wrote responding to Michael Kaplan,
> You might be OK if you play by the rules. Then again, you might not ;-)
>
You're OK if you play by the rules.
At least with me.
> A few details; You can not use neither Arial Unicode MS nor Code 2000 to
> show Indic text with Uniscribe on
---
> > From: Michael (michka) Kaplan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> > Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 12:11 PM
> > To: Michael Jansson
> > Cc: Unicode List
> > Subject: Re: Unicode Devanagari Font in Mozilla
> >
> >
> > Since you are not allowed to redistribute
son
> Cc: Unicode List
> Subject: Re: Unicode Devanagari Font in Mozilla
>
>
> Since you are not allowed to redistribute Latha, Mangal, et.
> al., this is
> really not going to be too much of a hardship for anyone
> playing by the
> rules, is it? :-)
>
> They
represented
MichKa
Michael Kaplan
Trigeminal Software, Inc. -- http://www.trigeminal.com/
- Original Message -
From: "Michael Jansson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, July 16, 2002 2:34 AM
Subject: Re: Unicode Devanagari Font in Mozilla
> James Kass wrote:
> The best way to render a Devanagari page is with Unicode encoding
> and smart font technology. With an up-to-date version of the
> Uniscribe software installed, Devanagari can be properly displayed
> even on Win 9x, as long as the browser uses the Uniscri
ither a glyph-set or font-encoding standard is
> required or that all platforms that
> need this support need to have OT/Intelligent font support.
>
The best way to render a Devanagari page is with Unicode encoding
and smart font technology. With an up-to-date version of the
Uniscribe s
James Kass wrote:
01d501c22a38$7d41e1c0$2408e343@joblowe">
Prabhat Hedge wrote,
* Indic scripts do not have any standard (as in published/registered/ recognized) font encoding that i know of.
ISCII is the standard for Indic scripts.
ISCII is not a font-encoding, I
Prabhat Hedge wrote,
> * Indic scripts do not have any standard (as in published/registered/
> recognized) font encoding that i know of.
ISCII is the standard for Indic scripts.
> * Indian language web-sites use mis-use charset tag "x-user-defined".
So do some non-Indian language web sites
resend.
Original Message
Subject:
Re: Unicode Devanagari Font in Mozilla
Date:
Thu, 11 Jul 2002 20:58:03 -0700 (PDT)
From:
Prabhat Hegde <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Reply-To:
Prabhat
Dipali Choudhary asked
> Every time Mozilla is using default devanagari font for showing the
> characters. What should I do to change default font?
>
Mozilla does not seem to allow you to choose a font for Devanagari.
Edit > Preferences... > Category > Appearance > Fonts
Hello,
I am newbie in the area.I am using mozilla 0.7 on Linux 7.2. I can
see devangari text in it. but there is problem of shifted matras.
What should I need to do to correctly position it.
Every time Mozilla is using default devanagari font for showing the
characters. What should I
the one that transforms
> > into the reph.
>
> You are wrong, in fact, sorry. Although figure 9-3 does not show code point
> values, both the glyphs and the abbreviated letter names make it clear that
> the sequence is:
>
> U+0930 (DEVANAGARI LETTER RA)
> U+09
On Fri, 8 Mar 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> Jim Agenbroad responded (off list):
>
> >Not quite. On page 214 of 3.0 there is one RA vowel, a halant and a
> RI
> >vowel: RA(d) + RI(n) --> RI(n) +RA(sup) ( parens in lieu ofsubscript)
>
> I didn't realise that "RI" meant the vocalic R. I m
t; >In
> >> >Cham, independent vowels can take dependent vowel signs. In
> >> >Devanagari, I guess that doesn't occur, but the Brahmic model
> >> >shouldn't be understood to preclude this behaviour.
> >> [snip]
> >> - Pet
At 10:29 -0600 2002-03-08, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>Jim Agenbroad responded (off list):
>
>> Not quite. On page 214 of 3.0 there is one RA vowel, a halant and a
>RI
> >vowel: RA(d) + RI(n) --> RI(n) +RA(sup) ( parens in lieu ofsubscript)
>
>I didn't realise that "RI" meant the vocalic R. I
ED]]
Sent: Wednesday, 6 March 2002 12:14
To: Yaap Raaf
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: Devanagari enthousiasm!
On 06-03-2002 04:29:20 PM Yaap Raaf wrote:
>At 14:02 +0100 2002.03.06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>I am on a Mac and can't open it,
Well, this is going to be a problem fo
[EMAIL PROTECTED] scripsit:
> I didn't realise that "RI" meant the vocalic R.
It reflects the modern Hindi pronunciation of Skt /r=/.
--
John Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.reutershealth.com
I amar prestar aen, han mathon ne nen,http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
han mathon ne chae, a
Jim Agenbroad responded (off list):
>Not quite. On page 214 of 3.0 there is one RA vowel, a halant and a
RI
>vowel: RA(d) + RI(n) --> RI(n) +RA(sup) ( parens in lieu ofsubscript)
I didn't realise that "RI" meant the vocalic R. I mistook it to mean
something else. I find it a weakness of
On 03/08/2002 06:54:54 AM Michael Everson wrote:
>Using Apple's WorldText, I can confirm that short I did not reorder
>correctly when preceded by 0294. But the 0294 glyph was in another
>font.
>
>I wonder could we see some samples of this in actual Limbu text?
It's on its way.
- Peter
-
On 03/08/2002 05:09:46 AM Michael Everson wrote:
>At 15:36 -0600 07/03/2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>>I may be wrong, but I believe that example has < ra, halant, ra,
>>independent i >. The first ra is the one that transforms into the reph.
>
>You're wrong. RI in this case is a way of writin
At 11:26 +0100 2002-03-08, Marco Cimarosti wrote:
>You are wrong, in fact, sorry. Although figure 9-3 does not show code point
>values, both the glyphs and the abbreviated letter names make it clear that
>the sequence is:
>
> U+0930 (DEVANAGARI LETTER RA)
> U+094
Using Apple's WorldText, I can confirm that short I did not reorder
correctly when preceded by 0294. But the 0294 glyph was in another
font.
I wonder could we see some samples of this in actual Limbu text?
--
Michael Everson *** Everson Typography *** http://www.evertype.com
At 15:16 -0500 07/03/2002, James E. Agenbroad wrote:
>On Wed, 6 Mar 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>> On 03/06/2002 08:25:18 AM Michael Everson wrote:
> [snip]
>>
>> >In
>> >Cham, independent vowels can take dependent vowel signs. I
At 15:36 -0600 07/03/2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>I may be wrong, but I believe that example has < ra, halant, ra,
>independent i >. The first ra is the one that transforms into the reph.
You're wrong. RI in this case is a way of writing the vocalic r.
Compare Kr.s.n.a and Krishna.
--
Mich
and at least one Sanskrit textbook agrees.
>
> I may be wrong, but I believe that example has < ra, halant, ra,
> independent i >. The first ra is the one that transforms
> into the reph.
You are wrong, in fact, sorry. Although figure 9-3 does not show code point
values, both
t for other reasons, such
as "it's not in the font", but there are lots of things "outside of the
block" that could be used and useful in such a context.)
Rick
> The question is whether there is any problem using U+0294, and whether
> proposing
I have gotten the answer on the question Michael raised about the glottal
stop: it does *not* have an inherent vowel.
So, given that, I return to the original question:
The question is whether there is any problem using U+0294, and whether
proposing a Devanagari-specific character would be
On 03/07/2002 02:16:10 PM "James E. Agenbroad" wrote:
>A similar but not the same situation is found in the fourth example in
>figure 9-3 of Unicode 3.0 (page 214) where an intedpendent vowel has the
>"reph" (an abridged form of a the consonant 'ra') above it. Unicode
wants
>this encoded as con
On Wed, 6 Mar 2002 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> On 03/06/2002 08:25:18 AM Michael Everson wrote:
[snip]
>
> >In
> >Cham, independent vowels can take dependent vowel signs. In
> >Devanagari, I guess that doesn't occur, but the Brahmic model
> >
f course be excepted).
I agree. What I'm hoping to find out is whether developers of various
(whatever) software products can verify whether their code behave
correctly in this regard. This would likely be speaking to ICU, Java or
other implementations of Devanagari rendering, or Deva
On 03/06/2002 03:12:20 PM Michael Everson wrote:
>>But a font is not a ISO/IEC 10646 subset! By definition, it contains
glyph
>>codes, not character codes. They are in two different worlds.
>
>But in public procurement a subset may be specified, in which case
>ASCII will be implied. I don't know
> implementations might
> not recognise a sequence like < consonant, vowel, nukta > as
> valid. For
> instance, I understand that if Uniscribe encountered such a
> sequence, it
> would assume you've left out a consonant immediately before
> the nukta,
> and it would display a dotted circ
On 03/06/2002 08:25:18 AM Michael Everson wrote:
>That almost answers my first question. Does Devanagari glottal have
>an inherent vowel? If it does, encode a new character.
That seems like a very good metric to consider, and I hadn't thought of it
myself. I'd expect that
Michael Everson said:
> >No, a Unicode font does not need to contain Latin letters.
>
> A valid ISO/IEC 10646 subset must contain ASCII.
Besides others pointing out the obvious disconnect
between 10646 subsets and what can be in a valid
Unicode font (which contains glyphs, not characters),
this
At 12:07 -0800 2002-06-03, Rick McGowan wrote:
>At 11:03 -0800 2002-06-03, John Hudson wrote:
>
>> >No, a Unicode font does not need to contain Latin letters.
>
>And Michael Everson responded:
>
>> A valid ISO/IEC 10646 subset must contain ASCII.
>
>But a font is not a ISO/IEC 10646 subset! By d
Michael Everson scripsit:
> A valid ISO/IEC 10646 subset must contain ASCII.
But a 10646 subset is a coded character set, not a font.
--
John Cowan http://www.ccil.org/~cowan [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To say that Bilbo's breath was taken away is no description at all. There
are
On 06-03-2002 04:29:20 PM Yaap Raaf wrote:
>At 14:02 +0100 2002.03.06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
>I am on a Mac and can't open it,
Well, this is going to be a problem for non-Windows clients, I admit.
>it's a
>244K .exe Why an .exe?
I don't know if this is what the BBC was trying to do, but
At 11:03 -0800 2002-06-03, John Hudson wrote:
> >No, a Unicode font does not need to contain Latin letters.
And Michael Everson responded:
> A valid ISO/IEC 10646 subset must contain ASCII.
But a font is not a ISO/IEC 10646 subset! By definition, it contains glyph
codes, not character codes.
At 11:03 -0800 2002-06-03, John Hudson wrote:
>>It has about 600 glyphs. But no Latin letters, which, IIRC,
>>disqualifies it as a real Unicode font?
>
>No, a Unicode font does not need to contain Latin letters.
A valid ISO/IEC 10646 subset must contain ASCII.
--
Michael Everson *** Everson Typ
At 08:29 3/6/2002, Yaap Raaf wrote:
>There was another message announcing Raghu font.
>
> >Subject: Free Unicode Hindi fonts
> >From:Dakshin Shantakumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> >Newsgroups: alt.language.hindi soc.culture.indian
> >Date:2 Mar 2002 13:51:45 -0800
>
>Downloadable
At 02:24 3/6/2002, Herman Ranes wrote:
>There is a related problem in connection with Norwegian typography: Most
>fonts include the 'fi' and 'ffi' ligatures, but I have never heard of a
>commercial font which includes the 'fj' ligature.
>
>Using such a font, the word 'fire' (four) would be liga
On 03/06/2002 04:24:54 AM Herman Ranes wrote:
>There is a related problem in connection with Norwegian typography:
>Most fonts include the 'fi' and 'ffi' ligatures, but I have never
>heard of a commercial font which includes the 'fj' ligature.
That's quite a different problem. All it would take
At 17:29 +0100 2002-06-03, Yaap Raaf wrote:
>There was another message announcing Raghu font.
>
>>Subject: Free Unicode Hindi fonts
>>From:Dakshin Shantakumar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>>Newsgroups: alt.language.hindi soc.culture.indian
>>Date:2 Mar 2002 13:51:45 -0800
>
>Downloada
At 14:02 +0100 2002.03.06, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>I interpret this to mean one may not legitimately use this font for any
>purpose other than viewing the BBC website.
If http://www.bbc.co.uk/hindi/images/download_text.gif
is any indication, the font doesn't look too promising.
Have you seen
* Herman Ranes <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> [2002-03-06 11:24]:
> There is a related problem in connection with Norwegian typography:
> Most fonts include the 'fi' and 'ffi' ligatures, but I have never
> heard of a commercial font which includes the 'fj' ligature.
>From the Adobe OpenType user guide:
(h
ed that this character should be represented using what looks pretty
>much like the IPA glottal symbol (U+0294), though in a Devanagari font it
>would have to be designed to match Devanagari characters.
I see this in version 2 of the Nepali White Paper
http://www.cicc.or.jp/english/hyoujyun
On Wednesday, March 6, 2002, at 03:24 AM, Herman Ranes wrote:
> There is a related problem in connection with Norwegian typography: Most
> fonts include the 'fi' and 'ffi' ligatures, but I have never heard of a
> commercial font which includes the 'fj' ligature.
>
Apple's Hoeffler font contai
On 06-03-2002 09:59:48 Yaap Raaf wrote:
>Win98: You need something called Opentype Devanagri fonts
>to VIEW the Hindi unicode text.
>You can get a good font for free from BBC Hindi site.
Except that the license that accompanies the font says:
COPYRIGHT AND ALL OTHER RIGHT, TITLE AND INTERE
Peter, I've been looking into Devanagari orthography for Kashmiri.
They're using AVAGRAHA as a vowel. It might be good if we took this
off line and compared data, as there may be overlap.
--
Michael Everson *** Everson Typography *** http://www.evertype.com
There is a related problem in connection with Norwegian typography:
Most fonts include the 'fi' and 'ffi' ligatures, but I have never
heard of a commercial font which includes the 'fj' ligature.
Using such a font, the word 'fire' (four) would be ligated correctly,
while 'fjerde' (fourth) would
gt;
> > > > go to view->encoding->more->Unicode(UTF-8)
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > ?? ???
> > > >
> > > > ? ? ??
> > >
> > > YES!
> > >
> > > You did it. I can read your Devanagari. Now please tell me how I can
>
For some of the lesser-known languages of Nepal, Devanagari script is used
but due to phonological differences it gets extended in ways not found in
the better-known languages of India that use Devanagari. There are two
specific issues that need to be addressed: (1) Limbu glottal; (2) nukta on
y Uniscribe and OpenType.
You can think of Keyman's wizard as similar to an assembler, except that
what it generates is not processor assembly code but rather rules in the
Keyman keyboard description language. For instance, if I use the Keyman
wizard and drag the shape for a Devanagari KA (U+
velop one.
>
>For simple behaviours, it can be quite easy; e.g. if you just need to
>assign Devanagari characters to keys on a US keyboard without any
>additional behaviour considerations, there's a wizard with a visual UI
>that you can use. If you need, though, you can creat
you just need to
assign Devanagari characters to keys on a US keyboard without any
additional behaviour considerations, there's a wizard with a visual UI
that you can use. If you need, though, you can create fairly sophisticated
input methods. How difficult it is depends on how complex the re
Has anybody tried the Aksharamala input system for
devanagari sold by http://www.aksharamala.com/ ?
It says: "Aksharamala is a standards-based software tool that
facilitates use of English QWERTY keyboards to input text
in Indian languages", but I am not sure what to think of
t
It should be fine also on Netscape 6.2
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED]">
I spoke to fast. Upon taking a closer look at the file, the font was not set properly. MacOS 9.2, Indian Language Kit, Mac IE 5.1 and Devanagari MT as font face seem to display UTF-8 encoded Hi
David Starner wrote:
> On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 02:20:17PM +0100, Marco Cimarosti wrote:
> > What this means in practice for website developers is:
> >
> > 1) SCSU text can only be edited with a text editor which
> properly decodes
> > the *whole* file on load and re-encodes it on save. On the
>
I spoke to fast. Upon taking a closer look at the file, the font was not set properly.
MacOS 9.2, Indian Language Kit, Mac IE 5.1 and Devanagari MT as font face seem to
display UTF-8 encoded Hindi just fine.
Etienne
>Date: Mon, 21 Jan 2002 10:24:16 -0800
> "[EMAIL PROTECTE
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 02:20:17PM +0100, Marco Cimarosti wrote:
> What this means in practice for website developers is:
>
> 1) SCSU text can only be edited with a text editor which properly decodes
> the *whole* file on load and re-encodes it on save. On the other hand, UTF-8
> text can also be
essage-
>> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
>> Behalf Of Aman Chawla
>> Sent: 21 January 2002 10:57
>> To: James Kass; Unicode
>> Subject: Re: Devanagari
>>
>>
>> - Original Message -
>> From: "James Kass&q
> Sent: 21 January 2002 10:57
> To: James Kass; Unicode
> Subject: Re: Devanagari
>
>
> - Original Message -
> From: "James Kass" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> To: "Aman Chawla" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Unicode"
> <[EMAIL PROTECTE
- Original Message -
From: "David Starner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Aman Chawla" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Unicode" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2002 22:27
Subject: Re: Devanagari
> On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 12:39:58AM -0500, Aman Chawl
- Original Message -
From: "David Starner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Aman Chawla" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Unicode" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Sunday, January 20, 2002 22:27
Subject: Re: Devanagari
> On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 12:39:58AM -0500, Aman Chawl
In a message dated 2002-01-21 5:20:55 Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Doug Ewell wrote:
>> Devanagari text encoded in SCSU occupies exactly 1 byte per
>> character, plus an additional byte near the start of the
>> file to set the current window (0x14 =
In a message dated 2002-01-21 1:33:23 Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Do you know of any published web pages that use SCSU? I think that's
> probably the place to start. I never add support for encodings I can't
> find in actual use on the web. (Hint hint. :)
This becomes a v
Doug Ewell wrote:
> Devanagari text encoded in SCSU occupies exactly 1 byte per
> character, plus an additional byte near the start of the
> file to set the current window (0x14 = SC4).
The problem is what happens if that very byte gets corrupted for any
reason...
If an octet is er
On Sun, 20 Jan 2002 23:57:29 -0500
"Aman Chawla" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> With regards to South Asia, where the most widely used modems are approx. 14
> kbps, maybe some 36 kbps and rarely 56 kbps, where broadband/DSL is mostly
> unheard of, efficiency in data transmission is of paramount i
tandard might be to offer a translation of some of that material
in Unicode Hindi, with the respective authors' permissions, of course,
and post it on the web.
With newer operating systems being Unicode-based, there are no special
plug-ins or filters involved. A sophisticated and elegant wri
Aman,
What is it you want? To complain about the architecture of Unicode
and UTF-8? For good or ill, it isn't going to change. Neither was it
a conspiracy to suppress the non-English-speaking peoples of the
world.
--
Michael Everson *** Everson Typography *** http://www.evertype.com
* [EMAIL PROTECTED]
|
| This is why I really wish that SCSU were considered a truly
| "standard" encoding scheme. Even among the Unicode cognoscenti it
| is usually accompanied by disclaimers about "private agreement only"
| and "not suitable for use on the Internet," where the former claim
| i
At 00:39 -0500 2002-01-21, Aman Chawla wrote:
>The issue was originally brought up to gather opinion from members of this
>list as to whether UTF-8 or ISCII should be used for creating Devanagari web
>pages. The point is not to criticise Unicode but to gather opinions of
>informed p
At 23:19 -0600 2002-01-20, David Starner wrote:
>There is no simple encoding scheme that will encode Indic text in
>Unicode in one byte per character.
Raw 32-bit encoding treats all characters equally, doesn't it? :-)
--
Michael Everson *** Everson Typography *** http://www.evertype.com
101 - 200 of 258 matches
Mail list logo
