# In charts and illustrations in this standard,
# the combining nature of these marks
# is illustrated by applying them to a dotted circle,
How should be such chart coded?
The character 25CC DOTTED CIRCLE was mentioned
as a possible base character,
but the on-line reference says:
note that the
On Monday, March 29, 2004 8:11 PM
John Cowan va escriure:
Well, it depends on what the equivoque combining marks in the title
of Section 7.7 means.
Ah! This is the place where I did not seek into! (It was not obvious to me
that text about the dependent vowel marks has to be searched into the
On 29/03/2004 16:28, Kenneth Whistler wrote:
...
Using NBSP rather than SPACE has several advantages, and has long been
specified in Unicode, although not widely implemented. It is less likely
to occur accidentally. But it has disadvantages, especially that it will
always be a spacing
On 30/03/2004 04:31, John Cowan wrote:
Peter Kirk scripsit:
Yes it is, in Unicode 4.0.0. Ernest quoted from UAX #14 All other space
characters have fixed width. This may be in the standard by mistake,
but it is in the standard. Asmus says that this will be changed in
4.0.1, but that has
At 07:31 -0500 2004-03-30, John Cowan wrote:
Peter Kirk scripsit:
Yes it is, in Unicode 4.0.0. Ernest quoted from UAX #14 All other space
characters have fixed width. This may be in the standard by mistake,
but it is in the standard. Asmus says that this will be changed in
4.0.1, but that
Peter Kirk scripsit:
I accept that some standards do have sections which are described as
informative, and as such they are an exception to what I wrote. But as
the purpose of a standard is to be normative, it is reasonable to
assume, as I have, that its text is normative unless otherwise
At 04:28 PM 3/29/2004, Kenneth Whistler wrote:
I will say again as I have said before - but the above (and what I
snipped) is extra evidence for it - that what is broke ... is
the rule that the isolated (generally spacing) form of a combining mark
should be formed by SPACE or NBSP followed by
[Original Message]
From: Asmus Freytag [EMAIL PROTECTED]
At 12:19 PM 3/29/2004, Ernest Cline wrote:
UAX #14 makes a rather definitive statement on this issue, albeit
in an obscure place, in Section 3: Introduction.
4.0.1 will amend that section to correct the wrong impression that
Peter Kirk scripsit:
In each of these cases FIGURE SPACE may be appropriate. Are any of these
alternative spaces non-breaking? That is also a requirement in my last
two applications.
You can make anything non-breaking by putting ZWNBSP on both sides of it.
--
John Cowan
Asmus Freytag wrote:
and I don't know whether FOUR-PER-EM is the width of a typical space.
FOUR-PER-EM is 1/4 of an em, always. A typical space, however, varies
in width depending on the font.
~fantasai
Hi James, All,
If this is treated as a Unicode issue rather than a display issue, then
one solution
would be for someone to propose a new character, (back on topic a little
bit)
COMBINING DOTTED CIRCLE FOR COMBINING MARKS.
Then, rather than inserting DOTTED CIRCLE into the display, a
On Sunday, March 28, 2004 12:03 AM, James Kass wrote:
So, if the question is how to make an OpenType font *not* display the
dotted circle on Windows with Uniscribe, one idea would be to add a
spacing glyph to U+25CC (DOTTED CIRCLE) in the font.
If you do so, you will end with defeating the
Antoine Leca scripsit:
In the general case of a font intended for general use, and if the rendering
without the circle is intended in special cases like drawing a keyboard
layout for reference, I still believe it is better to have the circle and
resort to special manipulations, like
On 27/03/2004 17:17, John Hudson wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, if the question is how to make an OpenType font *not* display the
dotted
circle on Windows with Uniscribe, one idea would be to add a spacing
glyph to
U+25CC (DOTTED CIRCLE) in the font. This spacing glyph should be a
On 28/03/2004 18:35, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
...
People generating texts for educational purposes will always have special needs.
So, they'll always need to make special effort to get special effects. Workarounds
concerning the original question have already been suggested.
If this is treated
On 29/03/2004 04:14, John Cowan wrote:
Antoine Leca scripsit:
In the general case of a font intended for general use, and if the rendering
without the circle is intended in special cases like drawing a keyboard
layout for reference, I still believe it is better to have the circle and
resort
On Monday, March 29, 2004 2:14 PM, John Cowan va escriure:
The bottom line is that SP+vowel and NBSP+vowel are prescribed by the
Unicode Standard,
I am sorry John, I should have miss a post of yours. I asked you where it is
written, and did not find any answer to this; unless someone consider
The bottom line is that SP+vowel and NBSP+vowel are prescribed by the
Unicode Standard, and if they don't work (at least the former; for the
latter, one can weasel out by claiming conformity with earlier
versions
of the Standard) the system is broken.
Or the system is conformant but doesn't
Peter Kirk scripsit:
Using NBSP rather than SPACE has several advantages, and has long been
specified in Unicode, although not widely implemented. It is less likely
to occur accidentally. But it has disadvantages, especially that it will
always be a spacing character, whereas for display
On 29/03/2004 06:35, Peter Constable wrote:
The bottom line is that SP+vowel and NBSP+vowel are prescribed by the
Unicode Standard, and if they don't work (at least the former; for the
latter, one can weasel out by claiming conformity with earlier
versions
of the Standard) the system is
On 29/03/2004 06:56, John Cowan wrote:
Peter Kirk scripsit:
Using NBSP rather than SPACE has several advantages, and has long been
specified in Unicode, although not widely implemented. It is less likely
to occur accidentally. But it has disadvantages, especially that it will
always be a
You can't get away with it that easily. If the standard specifies that
space, combining mark should be displayed as an isolated combining
mark, then it would be conformant for a partial implementation to
display this sequence as nothing or as an illegal sequence. But if the
system attempts to
Antoine Leca scripsit:
I am sorry John, I should have miss a post of yours. I asked you where it is
written, and did not find any answer to this; unless someone consider that
all marks, including spacing combining vowels, are (European) diacritics.
Well, it depends on what the equivoque
On 29/03/2004 08:42, Peter Constable wrote:
You can't get away with it that easily. If the standard specifies that
space, combining mark should be displayed as an isolated combining
mark, then it would be conformant for a partial implementation to
display this sequence as nothing or as an illegal
John Cowan quoted,
Well, it depends on what the equivoque combining marks in the title of
Section 7.7 means. This is where (p. 187) the remarks about SP and NBSP
appear:
# Marks as Spacing Characters. By convention, combining marks may be exhibited
# in (apparent) isolation by applying
On 29/03/2004 10:11, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Antoine Leca scripsit:
I am sorry John, I should have miss a post of yours. I asked you where it is
written, and did not find any answer to this; unless someone consider that
all marks, including spacing combining vowels, are (European)
[Original Message]
From: Peter Kirk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 29/03/2004 06:56, John Cowan wrote:
Peter Kirk scripsit:
Using NBSP rather than SPACE has several advantages, and has long
been specified in Unicode, although not widely implemented. It is less
likely to occur accidentally.
Peter Kirk said:
I will say again as I have said before - but the above (and what I
snipped) is extra evidence for it - that what is broke ... is
the rule that the isolated (generally spacing) form of a combining mark
should be formed by SPACE or NBSP followed by the combining mark.
This
At 12:19 PM 3/29/2004, Ernest Cline wrote:
[Original Message]
From: Peter Kirk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 29/03/2004 06:56, John Cowan wrote:
Peter Kirk scripsit:
Using NBSP rather than SPACE has several advantages, and has long
been specified in Unicode, although not widely implemented. It
on this.
Srivas
- Original Message -
From: Peter Jacobi [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Avarangal [EMAIL PROTECTED]; Peter Constable
[EMAIL PROTECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Saturday, March 27, 2004 9:24 PM
Subject: RE: Printing and Displaying Dependent Vowels
Hi Srivas, Peter Kirk
Hi James, List members,
James Kass wrote:
U+0B82 TAMIL SIGN ANUSVARA is substituted and re-positioned in the
compound
glyphs of Code2000 for the normal dotted circle in the default glyphs for
U+0BCA, U+0BCB, and U+0BCC.
This is only expected to appear with a rendering system which does
John Hudson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, if the question is how to make an OpenType font *not* display the
dotted
circle on Windows with Uniscribe, one idea would be to add a spacing glyph
to
U+25CC (DOTTED CIRCLE) in the font. This spacing glyph should be a
C J Fynn wrote:
If someone wants this, isn't it possible to put a specific lookup in the font
so that any dependant vowel following a space character renders as a spacing
(stand-alone) dependant vowel? Surely a specific lookup should overide it being
displayed on a dotted circle by default.
Not
C J Fynn responded to John Hudson,
If someone wants this, isn't it possible to put a specific lookup in the font
so that any dependant vowel following a space character renders as a spacing
(stand-alone) dependant vowel? Surely a specific lookup should overide it being
displayed on a dotted
Hi Srivas, Peter Kirk, Peter Constable, List Members
Peter Constable wrote:
Peter Kirk wrote:
Are these dependent on the font, as some have
suggested, or are they prescribed by Uniscribe? Do different versions
of
Uniscribe differ in this respect, as I rather think?
At present, I don't
Peter Jacobi wrote,
Using the Linux version of Abiword, which uses the Pango renderer,
both the Code 2000 and the MS Latha font display the vowel signs without the
unwanted dotted circle. NBSP and normal SPACE give identical results.
For Code 2000 only, the dotted circle or a similiar
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
So, if the question is how to make an OpenType font *not* display the dotted
circle on Windows with Uniscribe, one idea would be to add a spacing glyph to
U+25CC (DOTTED CIRCLE) in the font. This spacing glyph should be a no-contour
glyph, perhaps with the same advance
At 01:55 +0100 2004-03-26, Chris Jacobs wrote:
Avarangal scripsit:
Can any one provide information on the sequences used for diplaying
and printing dependent vowels as standalones.
The standards-conforming way to do so is to precede the dependent vowel
with a space character (U+0020).
On 25/03/2004 13:33, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Avarangal scripsit:
Can any one provide information on the sequences used for diplaying
and printing dependent vowels as standalones.
The standards-conforming way to do so is to precede the dependent vowel with a
space character (U+0020). If
At 02:39 -0800 2004-03-26, Peter Kirk wrote:
There are two standards-conforming way of doing these. One is to
precede the dependent vowel with a space character; the other is to
precede it with a non-breaking space. The latter method is
preferable, especially if the standalone dependent vowel
On 26/03/2004 03:04, Michael Everson wrote:
At 02:39 -0800 2004-03-26, Peter Kirk wrote:
There are two standards-conforming way of doing these. One is to
precede the dependent vowel with a space character; the other is to
precede it with a non-breaking space. The latter method is
preferable,
Avarangal asked about
the requirements by educational establishments is the ability
to print and display dependent vowels without dotted circles.
John Cowan answered:
Avarangal scripsit:
Can any one provide information on the sequences used for diplaying
and printing dependent vowels as
From: Antoine Leca [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Avarangal asked about
the requirements by educational establishments is the ability
to print and display dependent vowels without dotted circles.
John Cowan answered:
Avarangal scripsit:
Can any one provide information on the sequences used for
Sorry to answer my own post.
Avarangal asked about
the requirements by educational establishments is the ability
to print and display dependent vowels without dotted circles.
John Cowan answered:
Avarangal scripsit:
Can any one provide information on the sequences used for diplaying
and
From: Antoine Leca [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It seems many are thinking about the section in 2.10, titled Spacing Clones
of European Diacritical Marks. I read it as applying to diacritical marks
(and perhaps only European ones, but the distinction looks like blurry to
me). Beginning of 2.10 makes
At end of my response to Antoine Leca, I suggested something which may merit
some comments:
What is clear is that there's no way to enable these features explicitly in
plain-text files, if there's no standard format control in Unicode to enable
these OpenType font features. May be these could
Avarangal wrote:
display dependent vowels without dotted circles.
Can any one provide information on the sequences used for
diplaying and printing dependent vowels as standalones.
Microsoft's Uniscribe allows you to display a dependent vowel with the
following sequence (to be followed
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf
Of Philippe Verdy
At end of my response to Antoine Leca, I suggested something which may
merit
some comments:
Does that imply that it might also *not* merit comments?
What is clear is that there's no way to enable these
On Friday, March 26, 2004 7:12 PM, Philippe Verdy va escriure:
Indic scripts are a bit unique by the fact that they have a syllabic
structure decomposed into separate letters with a base consonnant and
a combining (this is not the proper term for Unicode) vowel
modifier after it. This differs
Philippe Verdy va escriure:
Space is a base character, then it combines with the next diacritic
with which it creates a default grapheme cluster which should be
interpreted as if it was a single character identity.
Agreed so far for diacritics. Agreed also for non-spacing dependent vowels
From: Peter Constable [EMAIL PROTECTED]
What is clear is that there's no way to enable these features
explicitly in
plain-text files, if there's no standard format control in Unicode to
enable
these OpenType font features. May be these could become new
characters to
allocate in plane
This sounds suspiciously like courtyard codes. (Wonders to self:
Are
Philippe Verdy and William Overington aliases for the same
person?
:-)
I can ensure you that this is not the same person (look at the country
of origin
detected in the IP address if you are still not convinced).
Well,
On 26/03/2004 12:02, Peter Constable wrote:
...
This sounds suspiciously like courtyard codes. (Wonders to self: Are
Philippe Verdy and William Overington aliases for the same person?
:-)
...
Peter, I notice that you have found time while looking at this thread to
criticise Philippe's
From: Peter Kirk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Peter, I notice that you have found time while looking at this thread
to criticise
Philippe's ramblings and speculate about his identity.
Yes, he and I have having fun offline debating his identity :-)
Perhaps
you can use some of your time more
We are in the process of updating Tamil keyboard
drivers and one of the requirements by educational establishments is the ability
to print and display dependent vowels without dotted circles.
Can any one provide information on the sequences
used for diplaying and printing dependent vowels
Avarangal scripsit:
Can any one provide information on the sequences used for diplaying
and printing dependent vowels as standalones.
The standards-conforming way to do so is to precede the dependent vowel with a
space character (U+0020). If this sequence is not displayed correctly, complain
- Original Message -
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Avarangal [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Thursday, March 25, 2004 10:33 PM
Subject: Re: Printing and Displaying Dependent Vowels
Avarangal scripsit:
Can any one provide information on the sequences used for diplaying
Chris Jacobs chris dot jacobs at freeler dot nl wrote:
If this sequence is not displayed correctly, complain to your
software or font vendor, but it should be.
Here I disagree. A font does not have to support each and every
combining sequence. If he needs fonts which support combining
58 matches
Mail list logo
