Robert R. Chilton acip at well dot com wrote:
It should be mentioned that there are different normalized forms; I've
been referring, more or less, to Normalization Form D --which is the
form needed by processes that do searching and sorting.
This is perhaps a bit oversimplified. Processes
--- Start of forwarded message ---
From: Robert R. Chilton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 08 Jan 2003 00:16:35 -0500
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: PRC asking for 956 precomposed Tibetan characters
To: Andrew C. West [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Andrew C. West wrote:
On Tue
-0500
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED], [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Re: PRC asking for 956 precomposed Tibetan characters
To: Andrew C. West [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Andrew C. West wrote:
...
Nevertheless, whether the Chinese proposal fails to include certain
transliteration letters or obscure
On Tue, 07 Jan 2003 06:16:43 -0800 (PST), Robert R. Chilton wrote:
I understand your interest in preserving the semantic or lexical
distinction between an instance of a contracted series of single vowels
and a true usage of the double vowel. However, the procedure of
normalization is
At 20:18 -0800 2002-12-29, Asmus Freytag wrote:
For example, even though UTC approved the COMBINING RIGHT DOT in
principle, it didn't get added for Unicode 4.0 or the corresponding
ISO edition.
It might have been, but the proposal didn't get discussed at the
Tokyo meeting because the
A minor correction--EUDCEDIT does convert the bitmap to outline and save them as a
TrueType file.
John
Global Infrastructure
-Original Message-
From: Doug Ewell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, December 29, 2002 7:19 PM
To: Unicode Mailing List
Cc: Chris Fynn; [EMAIL
Yes, all versions of Windows 2000 and XP ship the same editor.
I guarantee that the fonts I create with it (mostly smiley faces) aren't publication
quality. Someone with more patience and talent could undoubtedly do better but perhaps
the criteria should be split into a) format and b)
John McConnell johnmcco at windows dot microsoft dot com wrote:
A minor correction--EUDCEDIT does convert the bitmap to outline and
save them as a TrueType file.
Thanks, I didn't know that. I stand corrected.
Is this capability also available on Private Character Editor for U.S.
versions of
Asmus Freytag asmusf at ix dot netcom dot com wrote:
Neither the committees (nor the editors - if I may add that) are mere
automata, nor are they juries in the anglo-saxon sense (limited to
consider the law in light of what evidence is formally brought before
them). Rather they are populated
- Original Message -
From: Robert R. Chilton [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Sunday, December 29, 2002 9:34 AM
Subject: [tibex] Re: PRC asking for 956 precomposed characters
I had heard some rumors about this proposal over the past year and I was
interested to finally
Chris Fynn cfynn at gmx dot net quoted Robert R. Chilton acip at well
dot com:
As noted above, the character set of n2558 does not even fully
support usages of Tibetan script in regions outside of China.
(The notation of Worldwide in question 5 of the Part C.:
Technical-Justification in the
At 07:19 PM 12/29/02 -0800, Doug Ewell wrote:
even though the answer would clearly be yes for all if
COMBINING RIGHT DOT, also proposed, were encoded or otherwise
accommodated.
...
I wonder if such blatan[tly incoorrect statements] on the standard proposal
questionnaire catches the attention of
Asmus Freytag asmusf at ix dot netcom dot com wrote:
For example, even though UTC approved the COMBINING RIGHT DOT in
principle, it didn't get added for Unicode 4.0 or the corresponding
ISO edition. If the proposal had been just for that character, the
cost/benefit of squeezing a single
On Thu, 19 Dec 2002 01:48:05 -0800 (PST), Anto'nio Martins-Tuva'lkin wrote:
Am I just clueless or it should be U+0308 instead of U+00A8? (Checks
U0080.pdf...) Hm, even Homer dozed sometimes... :-)
Oops !
On 12/17/2002 11:08:59 PM David Starner wrote:
I've only seen one request for more Ethiopic
characters, a good sign that the right choice was made.
There are still new Ethiopic characters being invented (hence there will be
more proposals), but it was still the right choice to treat these the
John Hudson wrote:
The Ethiopic script is *not* made up of sub-syllabic units:
the syllable is
the minimum unit of writing. The same is true to Yi and the Canadian
Aboriginal Syllabics. The fact that Ethiopic has recently been input
phonetically should not lead to confusion about the
different from modern
written Tibetan), but it seems from a brief perusal to cover the vast majority
of complex stacks and Sanskrit forms that are used for writing religious texts.
The reason why this set of precomposed Tibetan stacks is so comprehensive is
presumably due to the great number
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002 02:10:13 -0800 (PST), Marco Cimarosti wrote:
2. Come up with a precise machine-readable mapping file between
BrdaRten encoding to *decomposed* Unicode Tibetan, possibly accompanied by a
sample conversion application.
The mapping is simple, and given a mapping table I
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002, Andrew C. West wrote:
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002 01:20:00 -0800 (PST), Michael Everson wrote:
ME These 950 syllables are insufficient to express anything but
ME newspaper and bureaucratic Tibetan.
ACW everything, and if the proposal were to be accepted, the existing Tibetan
ACW
Andrew C. West wrote:
If anyone thinks that a mapping table would be
useful as a weapon in the fight against the Chinese proposal,
I would be happy to provide one.
Do you have the relevant data? As I said, so far I found little or nothing
about BrdaRten or about the Founders System mentioned
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002 04:59:08 -0800 (PST), Marco Cimarosti wrote:
Do you have the relevant data? As I said, so far I found little or nothing
about BrdaRten or about the Founders System mentioned by Ken Whistler.
Don't need anything more than the code charts given in n2558.pdf - it's simply a
Andrew C. West wrote:
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002 04:59:08 -0800 (PST), Marco Cimarosti wrote:
Do you have the relevant data? As I said, so far I found
little or nothing
about BrdaRten or about the Founders System mentioned
by Ken Whistler.
Don't need anything more than the code charts
N2558,
except that the latter mentions Founder as an *example* of a precomposed
Tibetan implementation (2). We don't necessarily want to be making
vendor/legacy/font-based to unicode mapping tables for every potential
vendor, do we?
Thomas Chan
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Wed, 18 Dec 2002 06:00:42 -0800 (PST), Kent Karlsson wrote:
Are you saying that the reading (as in pronouncing) order for the letters does
not actually match the storage order (which I supposed was to be logical
order).
Similarly, are you saying that for collation order (dictionaries and
Marco,
I agree. I did some basic design work on an Ethiopian system and it was
decided to follow the same implementation system as Thai. We don't encode
every possible Thai glyph.
We felt that if it were ever Unicode encoded we needed to use the decomposed
characters rather than decomposing
On 2002.12.18, 13:16, Andrew C. West [EMAIL PROTECTED]
wrote:
decomposing U+00FC (LATIN SMALL LETTER U WITH DIAERESIS) into U+0075
(LATIN SMALL LETTER U) and U+00A8 (DIAERESIS).
Am I just clueless or it should be U+0308 instead of U+00A8? (Checks
U0080.pdf...) Hm, even Homer dozed sometimes...
At 07:47 -0800 2002-12-13, Andrew C. West wrote:
I have just noticed that the Chinese government have presented a proposal to
encode 956 BrdaRten characters in the BMP. See
http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/WG2/docs/n2558.pdf
Would I be correct in believing that there is no chance of these
On Fri, 13 Dec 2002, Andrew C. West wrote:
I have just noticed that the Chinese government have presented a proposal to
encode 956 BrdaRten characters in the BMP. See
http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/WG2/docs/n2558.pdf
Would I be correct in believing that there is no chance of these precomposed
Jungshik Shin wrote:
Is there any opentype/AAT font for Tibetan? Do Uniscribe, Pango,
ATSUI, and Graphite support them if there are opentype Tibetan fonts?
In addition to the principle of character encoding, the best practical
counterargument would come from a demonstration that Unicode
At 10:52 -0500 2002-12-17, Jungshik Shin wrote:
I sincerely hope the proposed character set won't become a second case
of Hangul precomposed syllables albeit in a scale about 10 times smaller.
It'd be interesting to see how South Korea will vote on this. It may
not be easy to vote against it
On Tue, 17 Dec 2002 08:45:05 -0800 (PST), Jungshik Shin wrote:
Is there any opentype/AAT font for Tibetan? Do Uniscribe, Pango,
ATSUI, and Graphite support them if there are opentype Tibetan fonts?
In addition to the principle of character encoding, the best practical
counterargument would
Jungshik Shin wrote:
[...]
http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/WG2/docs/n2558.pdf
[...]
Is there any opentype/AAT font for Tibetan? Do Uniscribe, Pango,
ATSUI, and Graphite support them if there are opentype Tibetan fonts?
In addition to the principle of character encoding, the best practical
At 7:32 PM +0100 12/17/02, Marco Cimarosti wrote:
Once the Tibetan BrdaRten characters are encoded
in BMP, many current systems supporting ISO/IEC10646 will enable Tibetan
processing without major modification.
There was an earlier proposal by the Chinese for a pre-composed
Tibetan set
At 19:32 +0100 2002-12-17, Marco Cimarosti wrote:
Tibetan BrdaRten characters are structure-stable characters widely
used in education, publication, classics documentation including Tibetan
medicine. The electronic data containing BrdaRten characters are
estimated beyond billions. Once the
At 11:37 -0800 2002-12-17, Carl W. Brown wrote:
Marco,
I was disappointed that Unicode used precomposed encoding for Ethiopic.
Heavens, why?
--
Michael Everson * * Everson Typography * * http://www.evertype.com
Message -
From: Alan Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Unicode Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 12:06 PM
Subject: RE: Precomposed Tibetan
Jungshik Shin wrote:
Is there any opentype/AAT font for Tibetan? Do Uniscribe, Pango,
ATSUI, and Graphite support them
Carl W. Brown wrote:
Marco,
I was disappointed that Unicode used precomposed encoding for
Ethiopic.
Was that my fault? I'm not even a member of Unicode!
_ Marco :-)
/TLK/index.html
which forms stacking characters based upon single characters.
Martin Heijdra
- Original Message -
From: Alan Wood [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Unicode Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Tuesday, December 17, 2002 12:06 PM
Subject: RE: Precomposed Tibetan
Jungshik Shin wrote
Michael Everson wrote:
What the encoding of a set of brDa rTen precomposed syllables would
do would be to restrict the Tibetans to this set, to which they have
been restricted by the proprietary Founder software used in China.
These 950 syllables are insufficient to express anything but
Marco,
I was disappointed that Unicode used precomposed encoding for Ethiopic.
Carl
Peter Lofting asked:
Presumedly the present proposal of 900+ stacks is a maturation of the
same system. And the claim for universality is based on it being able
to typeset everything they have published to-date.
It is based on the Founders system software, as Michael mentioned.
The
Michael,
I was disappointed that Unicode used precomposed encoding for Ethiopic.
Heavens, why?
I assume that you are being tongue-in-cheek. If not:
Since you key in syllables as consonant+vowel combinations you can keep the
encoding under 256 characters like most other languages with
Marco commented:
Another key point, IMHO, is verifying the following claim contained in the
proposal document:
Tibetan BrdaRten characters are structure-stable characters widely
used in education, publication, classics documentation including Tibetan
medicine. The electronic data
At 13:25 -0800 2002-12-17, Carl W. Brown wrote:
Since you key in syllables as consonant+vowel combinations
Inputting is unrelated to the encoding, and it is conceivable that a
non-alphabetic input method could exist for Ethiopic.
you can keep the encoding under 256 characters
There is
At 13:53 -0800 2002-12-17, Kenneth Whistler wrote:
The question for Unicoders is whether introduction of significant
normalization problems into Tibetan (for everyone) is a worthwhile tradeoff
for this claimed legacy ease of transition for one system, when it is
clear that all existing legacy
From: Michael Everson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
At 13:53 -0800 2002-12-17, Kenneth Whistler wrote:
The question for Unicoders is whether introduction of significant
normalization problems into Tibetan (for everyone) is a worthwhile
tradeoff
for this claimed legacy ease of transition for one system,
At 16:12 -0800 2002-12-17, Michael \(michka\) Kaplan wrote:
Everyone here KNOWS this. What Ken was pointing out is that not only will it
create such problems, but it will not solve the problem that they claim it
will. It was an additional reason to say no, and one they might be forced to
At 01:32 PM 12/17/2002, Kenneth Whistler wrote:
Peter Lofting asked:
Presumedly the present proposal of 900+ stacks is a maturation of the
same system. And the claim for universality is based on it being able
to typeset everything they have published to-date.
It is based on the Founders
On 12/17/2002 09:52:18 AM Jungshik Shin wrote:
Is there any opentype/AAT font for Tibetan? Do Uniscribe, Pango,
ATSUI, and Graphite support them if there are opentype Tibetan fonts?
I know that Chris Fynn has been working on a Tibetan font, but can't
comment on progress. OpenType tables for
At 01:25 PM 12/17/2002 -0800, Carl W. Brown wrote:
Michael,
I was disappointed that Unicode used precomposed encoding for Ethiopic.
Heavens, why?
I assume that you are being tongue-in-cheek. If not:
One of the issues with using a precomposed encoding instead of a decomposed
encoding is
At 01:25 PM 12/17/2002, Carl W. Brown wrote:
Michael,
I was disappointed that Unicode used precomposed encoding for Ethiopic.
Heavens, why?
I assume that you are being tongue-in-cheek. If not:
Since you key in syllables as consonant+vowel combinations you can keep the
encoding under 256
I have just noticed that the Chinese government have presented a proposal to
encode 956 BrdaRten characters in the BMP. See
http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/WG2/docs/n2558.pdf
These are precomposed glyphs for the most commonly encountered vertical stacks
of consonants and vowels. They are all already
52 matches
Mail list logo
