From: Rick McGowan [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Mike Ayers wrote:
The last I knew,
computer-savvy Taiwan and Hong Kong were continuing to invent new
characters. In the end, the onus is on the computer to
support the user.
Yes, the computer should support the user, but... The
On Tue, Nov 14, 2000 at 08:22:21AM -0800, D.V. Henkel-Wallace wrote:
Sadly, it seems unlikely that any furture change or adoption of orthography
will use characters not already supported by the then major computer
systems. In fact the trend seems to be the other way, viz Spain's changing
"D.V. Henkel-Wallace" wrote:
For a minority language (which all remaining unwritten languages are) the
pressure will be strong to use existing combinations (since they won't
constitute a large enough community for people to write special rendering
support).
OTOH minority languages have
Mark Davis wrote:
The Unicode Standard does define the rendering of such combinations, which
is in the absence of any other information to stack outwards.
A dumb implementation would simply move
the accent outwards if there was in the same position. This will not
necessarily produce an
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Unfortunately, there's no corresponding LATIN CAPITAL LETTER N WITH LONG
RIGHT LEG, which Lakota needs.
To my knowledge, the discussion in September between John Cowan and Curtis Clark
didn't terminate with any actual proposal, and I'm not clear on whether the above
From: D.V. Henkel-Wallace [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
At 06:30 2000-11-14 -0800, Marco Cimarosti wrote:
But my point was: not even Mr. Ethnologue himself knows
exactly *which*
combinations are meaningful, in all orthographic system.
And, clearly, no
one can figure out which combinations
Mike Ayers wrote:
The last I knew,
computer-savvy Taiwan and Hong Kong were continuing to invent new
characters. In the end, the onus is on the computer to support the user.
Yes, the computer should support the user, but... The invention of new characters to
serve multitudes is OK, and
On Tue, 14 Nov 2000, Rick McGowan wrote:
Mike Ayers wrote:
The last I knew,
computer-savvy Taiwan and Hong Kong were continuing to invent new
characters. In the end, the onus is on the computer to support the user.
Yes, the computer should support the user, but... The invention of new
Antoine Leca wrote:
My understanding is that there are a number of similar cases,
which are not
officially prohibited (AFAIK), but does not carry any sense.
For example, how about digits followed by accents (as
combining marks)?
Or the kana voicing/voiceless combining marks, when they
Monday, November 13, 2000 10:11
Subject: Re: Devanagari question
Marco Cimarosti wrote:
Antoine Leca wrote:
My understanding is that there are a number of similar cases,
which are not
officially prohibited (AFAIK), but does not carry any sense.
I think that the original idea beh
Thursday, November 8, 2000
After sending a comment on the Ra(sup) + independent vowel discussion two
more general Devanagari questions occurred to me:
1. Is a halant/virama ever valid following other than a consonant (or
consonant and nukta)? My
1. Is a halant/virama ever valid following other than a consonant (or
consonant and nukta)?
Legal? In the sense of "any string is legal", yes; as is anything else. The
implementation question to answer is whether it's useful or renderable, and if so, how.
The independent vowel followed by
On Thu, 9 Nov 2000, Rick McGowan wrote:
1. Is a halant/virama ever valid following other than a consonant (or
consonant and nukta)?
Legal? In the sense of "any string is legal", yes; as is anything else.
The implementation question to answer is whether it's useful or
renderable, and
13 matches
Mail list logo
