On Wednesday, August 06, 2003 12:36 PM, Kent Karlsson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > The NFD decompositions of spacing marks is alredy defined as a SPACE
> > plus a non-spacing combining character.
>
> Philippe, please! Those are *compatibility* decompositions. The
> normal form NFD only uses *c
__
http://www.macchiato.com
► “Eppur si muove” ◄
- Original Message -
From: "Peter Kirk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Jim Allan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 13:47
Subject: Re
> In the context of XML processing, where strings should (must?) be
FYI. It's "should" for XML 1.1, and it's quite explicitly stated that normalisation is
not required for a document to be well-formed. XML1.0 doesn't mention Unicode
normalisation, although plenty of applications built on top of
On 06/08/2003 15:47, Philippe Verdy wrote:
On Wednesday, August 06, 2003 11:48 PM, Peter Kirk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
OK, what kind of markup should I use, in any well-known markup
language, to ensure that an isolated diacritic is centred in the
space between the words before and after it?
Peter Kirk scripsit:
> Really? It looks to me as if U+00B4 and U+02D8 to U+02DD have only a
> compatibility equivalences to space plus diacritic, and U+005E and
> U+0060 don't even have compatibility equivalences.
Indeed. The last two, BTW, are because the ASCII repertoire has taken
on a life
Philip Verdy posted:
Could ZWS+combining diacritic may be the best solution for
isolated diacritics in text?
From http://www.unicode.org/book/ch04.pdf:
<< * Such characters may be large enough to effect the placement of
their base character relative to preceding and succeeding base
characters. F
On 09/08/2003 13:23, Noah Levitt wrote:
According to the docs at
http://www.microsoft.com/typography/otfntdev/indicot/other.htm,
uniscribe renders combining marks in isolation when they are
applied to SPACE + ZWJ. (Without the ZWJ, it uses a dotted
circle.) Perhaps this is an acceptable solution t
On 06/08/2003 15:24, Doug Ewell wrote:
Like Freud's cigar, sometimes a "may" is just a "may." And I suspect
the phrase "any intelligent typographer" MAY generate some flak from
typographers on this list who consider themselves "intelligent enough"
yet have a different opinion.
I'm not a typograph
age-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Peter Kirk
> Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 12:11 PM
> To: Curtis Clark
> Cc: Unicode List
> Subject: Re: Display of Isolated Nonspacing Marks (was Re:
> Questions on ZWNBS...)
>
>
> On 05/
On Wednesday, August 06, 2003 11:48 PM, Peter Kirk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> OK, what kind of markup should I use, in any well-known markup
> language, to ensure that an isolated diacritic is centred in the
> space between the words before and after it?
In plain text, I think that this encodin
> The NFD decompositions of spacing marks is alredy defined as a SPACE
> plus a non-spacing combining character.
Philippe, please! Those are *compatibility* decompositions. The normal
form NFD only uses *canonical* decompositions. And there is no such
thing as "NFD decompositions".
/ke
On 05/08/2003 09:42, Jim Allan wrote:
Peter Kirk posted:
If I want to do this, should I explicitly encode a dotted circle, or
should I encode nothing and expect the font to generate the dotted
circle, as it often does?
I think that practise of a font or application automaticaly inserting
a do
Ted Hopp asked:
> I believe that reasonable people might reasonably conclude from factoids 1
> and 2 that SPACE is indeed a format character.
>
> Reasonable, but evidently wrong. Explanation, please?
I provided the text deconstruction in my last email, but to
continue, the confusion arises from
On Thursday, August 07, 2003 8:06 PM, Peter Kirk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 06/08/2003 15:47, Philippe Verdy wrote:
>
> > On Wednesday, August 06, 2003 11:48 PM, Peter Kirk
> > <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >
> >
> >
> > > OK, what kind of markup should I use, in any well-known markup
> >
Peter Kirk scripsit:
> This is a clear demonstration that Microsoft also has problems with the
> mechanism which has been defined in the standard for ten years,
This is a clear demonstration that Uniscribe fails to implement a
standard correctly, a property unique neither to Microsoft nor to t
conformity.
Jony
-Original Message-
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Peter Kirk
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 12:11 PM
To: Curtis Clark
Cc: Unicode List
Subject: Re: Display of Isolated Nonspacing Marks (was Re:
Questions on ZWNBS...)
On 05/08/2003 16:59
On 05/08/2003 15:53, Ted Hopp wrote:
On Tuesday, August 05, 2003 5:40 PM, Mark Davis wrote:
Where did you get the notion that space is not a base character? And
base characters include those that are not control or format
characters. Space is neither one.
Well, I think Jim Allan pointed to
On 08/08/2003 09:54, Jim Allan wrote:
...
It certainly makes sense that in the case of space characters that
have a defined width that this width is innate to the definition of
the character and in such a case should take precidence over the width
of the normally non-spacing combining characte
> (provided that the whitespace normalization algorithm will not
> include in the whitespaces sequence and treat it
> isolately, something that a conforming HTML or XML processor
> should not do, as it should unify only sequences of ,
> , , , and only according to the context of the
> containing e
On 05/08/2003 14:40, Mark Davis wrote:
Where did you get the notion that space is not a base character? And
base characters include those that are not control or format
characters. Space is neither one.
The standard specifically states in a number of places that to exhibit
a combining mark in isol
___
http://www.macchiato.com
► “Eppur si muove” ◄
- Original Message -
From: "Kenneth Whistler" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, August 06, 2003 15:48
Subject: Re: Display of Isolate
On Sunday, August 10, 2003 9:30 AM, Mark Davis <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> > As for oe-ligature, the
> > French representative to WG3 (or its predecessor) said that France
> > could live without it.
>
> Even worse; the story I heard was that the committee had planned from
> the start to have Πa
on 2003-08-06 15:24 Doug Ewell wrote:
I'm not a typographer (intelligent or otherwise), but I'm having a tough
time seeing how Section 2.10 *requires* fonts and rendering engines to
give a space-plus-combining-diacritic combination the exact minimum
width of the diacritic alone, or to leave equal s
According to the docs at
http://www.microsoft.com/typography/otfntdev/indicot/other.htm,
uniscribe renders combining marks in isolation when they are
applied to SPACE + ZWJ. (Without the ZWJ, it uses a dotted
circle.) Perhaps this is an acceptable solution to the
people calling for a new character.
> > there is no such thing as "NFD decompositions".
>
> Sorry for the confusion. Still even with a NFKD decomposition,
And there is no such thing as NFKD decomposition either.
It goes as follows, in steps:
1. Canonical and compatibility decomposition mappings (one-step),
and canonical class
Peter Kirk wrote:
> Point taken. But when different fonts and rendering engines give
> different results because the standard is unclear or ambiguous, that
> is a matter for the discussion here. And when conforming fonts and
> rendering engines fail to give the required results, that may also be
Peter responded to Mark:
> On 05/08/2003 14:40, Mark Davis wrote:
>
> >Where did you get the notion that space is not a base character? And
> >base characters include those that are not control or format
> >characters. Space is neither one.
> >
> >The standard specifically states in a number of p
Peter Kirk asked:
> A similar issue which is not Hebrew related would be a (mythical)
> requirement to display a diacritic like 0315, 031B or 0322 in isolation.
> It would not always be appropriate to use a space or NBSP as a base
> character as this would indent the glyph from the beginning of
Philippe Verdy scripsit:
> Except that in that case, we are no speaking about something that has
> already been standardized, but only used as a legacy mean to achieve
> some results with mosre or less success.
It *is* part of the Unicode Standard. You want a stand-alone diacritic?
Use SP or NB
On 05/08/2003 17:13, Kenneth Whistler wrote:
Peter Kirk said:
From what Ken says, it sounds like it will be wrong from whenever
Unicode 4.0 is officially issued
Actually Unicode 4.0 was officially issued on April 17, 2003.
What we are waiting on now is for the publication of the text
o
> It *is* part of the Unicode Standard. You want a stand-alone
diacritic?
> Use SP or NBSP followed by the combining diacritic. It says so, right
there.
Yes. But it is not quite clear how this should interact with combining
characters
that aren't purely 'above' or 'below' a single character (in
> Please can you clarify. Is there anything unusual about
> positioning of nukta,
No, just another "Philippe mistake"... there are so many :-(
> or is it just like any other combining character? In a sequence
> , where A, B and C are base characters, where is the
> nukta located relative to t
Peter Kirk asked:
> If I want to do this, should I explicitly encode a dotted circle, or
> should I encode nothing and expect the font to generate the dotted
> circle, as it often does?
If you want to represent the text content of a dotted circle with
an accent on it, the recommended representa
On Sunday, August 10, 2003 9:17 PM, Peter Kirk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 10/08/2003 10:09, Michael Everson wrote:
>
> > It is the formally specified way to represent what you say you want
> > to represent. If an implementation doesn't do that nicely enough,
> > complain to the implementors.
On Sunday, August 10, 2003 12:32 AM, John Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Peter Kirk scripsit:
>
> > This is a clear demonstration that Microsoft also has problems with
> > the mechanism which has been defined in the standard for ten years,
>
> This is a clear demonstration that Uniscribe fai
On 10/08/2003 10:09, Michael Everson wrote:
At 01:30 +0200 2003-08-10, Philippe Verdy wrote:
Whateer you think, the SPACE+diacritic is still a hack, and certainly
not a canonical equivalent (including for its properties), of the
existing spacing diacritics, which also do not fit all usages beca
On 04/08/2003 17:36, Kenneth Whistler wrote:
> Peter Kirk asked:
> > A similar issue which is not Hebrew related would be a (mythical)
> > requirement to display a diacritic like 0315, 031B or 0322 in
> > isolation. It would not always be appropriate to use a space or
> > NBSP as a base character a
;[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Philippe Verdy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, August 09, 2003 20:13
Subject: Re: Display of Isolated Nonspacing Marks (was Re: Questions
on ZWNBS...)
> Philippe Verdy scripsit:
>
> > Except that in that ca
On 05/08/2003 16:59, Curtis Clark wrote:
on 2003-08-05 15:31 Peter Kirk wrote:
Thank you, Mark. This helps to clarify things, but still doesn't
explicitly answer my question of how to encode "a sentence like "In
this language the diacritic ^ may appear above the letters ...", but
instead of ^
On 06/08/2003 14:03, Doug Ewell wrote:
Peter Kirk wrote:
Point taken. But when different fonts and rendering engines give
different results because the standard is unclear or ambiguous, that
is a matter for the discussion here. And when conforming fonts and
rendering engines fail to give the
On 07/08/2003 09:27, Kent Karlsson wrote:
I was so glad that you got things so nearly right for once, and then
you go and spoil it with:
Another similar case would be the use of a isolated nukta (which
normally modifies a following base character): the sequence
Like all other combining c
Peter Kirk responded to my plea for everyone to relax a bit:
> >If everyone would just go off for a week or two on their
> >August vacation, like they should be, we could all come back
> >about Labor Day and we wouldn't have to be having these
> >discussions. ;-)
> >
> >--Ken
> OK, understood now
__
http://www.macchiato.com
► “Eppur si muove” ◄
- Original Message -
From: "Peter Kirk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Mark Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: "Unicode List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Tuesday, August 05, 2003 14:50
Subject: Re:
I was so glad that you got things so nearly right for once, and then
you go and spoil it with:
> Another similar case would be the use of a isolated nukta (which
> normally modifies a following base character): the sequence
>
Like all other combining characters, NUKTA follows the base
characte
Mark Davis scripsit:
> Where did you get the notion that space is not a base character? And
> base characters include those that are not control or format
> characters. Space is neither one.
Unfortunately, p. 88 of TUS3.0 (section 4.5, paragraph 3) says
"Zs, Zl, and Zp [characters] are considered
Peter Kirk wrote:
>> Or it may not. It may be a deficiency in the level of Unicode
>> support afforded by the fonts and rendering engines. ...
>
> If there are such deficiencies in fonts and rendering engines which
> purport to be Unicode compliant, that suggests a lack of clarity in
> the stand
Peter Kirk said:
> From what Ken says, it sounds like it will be wrong from whenever
> Unicode 4.0 is officially issued
Actually Unicode 4.0 was officially issued on April 17, 2003.
What we are waiting on now is for the publication of the text
of the book to catch up to that fact. ;-)
> beca
On 06/08/2003 03:54, Philippe Verdy wrote:
On Wednesday, August 06, 2003 1:59 AM, Curtis Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
on 2003-08-05 15:31 Peter Kirk wrote:
Thank you, Mark. This helps to clarify things, but still doesn't
explicitly answer my question of how to encode "a sentence like
On Wednesday, August 06, 2003 1:59 AM, Curtis Clark <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> on 2003-08-05 15:31 Peter Kirk wrote:
> > Thank you, Mark. This helps to clarify things, but still doesn't
> > explicitly answer my question of how to encode "a sentence like "In
> > this language the diacritic ^ may
On 04/08/2003 17:36, Kenneth Whistler wrote:
Peter Kirk asked:
A similar issue which is not Hebrew related would be a (mythical)
requirement to display a diacritic like 0315, 031B or 0322 in isolation.
It would not always be appropriate to use a space or NBSP as a base
character as this wou
Peter Kirk wrote:
> Suppose for example I want to write a sentence like "In this language
> the diacritic ^ may appear above the letters ...", but instead of ^ I
> want to use a combining character, a regularly positioned centred
> above the letter diacritic, which does not have a defined spacing
On 05/08/2003 15:09, Mark Davis wrote:
<< Zs, Zl, and Zp are considered format characters, but their
membership in the Z (separator) class takes precedence over their
membership in the Cf class, because the General Category assigns
only
a single value to each character. >>
Whenever yo
on 2003-08-05 15:31 Peter Kirk wrote:
Thank you, Mark. This helps to clarify things, but still doesn't
explicitly answer my question of how to encode "a sentence like "In this
language the diacritic ^ may appear above the letters ...", but instead
of ^ I want to use a combining character" and w
On Tuesday, August 05, 2003 5:40 PM, Mark Davis wrote:
> Where did you get the notion that space is not a base character? And
> base characters include those that are not control or format
> characters. Space is neither one.
Well, I think Jim Allan pointed to the source of this notion in his email
Peter Kirk posted:
If I want to do this, should I explicitly encode a dotted circle, or
should I encode nothing and expect the font to generate the dotted
circle, as it often does?
I think that practise of a font or application automaticaly inserting a
dotted circle under an orphaned combining c
55 matches
Mail list logo
