John Jenkins wrote:
And the proper solution for the race horse problem is for the People's
Hong Kong Jockey Club to refuse to let a horse race unless its name is
in Unicode. :-)
Wouldn't that be like putting the cart before the horse?
> On Jun 11, 2004, at 6:44 AM, Andrew C. West wrote:
>
> > Depite the oft-mentioned cutesy Hong Kong race horse names,
> > idiosyncratic
> > invented Han ideographs are a negligible component of the encoded CJK
> > repertoire. In my opinion there are thousands, possibly tens of
> > thousands, o
On Jun 11, 2004, at 1:20 PM, Kenneth Whistler wrote:
It would have been nice if a better mechanism for expressing
Han glyphic (and other types of) variants had been feasible
and in place before CJK Extension B went in, but that is
water under the bridge now. One can only hope that some
restraint an
On 11/06/2004 10:51, James Kass wrote:
...
Doesn't this mean that it isn't possible to stack a combining circumflex
above a combining spanning inverted breve? Does this mean we'd need
double-wide clones of all the combining marks in order to support such
combos?
Sounds like the same problem we
> Peter Constable wrote,
>
> > Don't forget canonical equivalence (I forgot about this as well): the
> > double-width diacritics have a combining class of 234 rather than 230.
> > This means that 0251 0361 0302 028A is canonically equivalent to 0251
> > 0302 0361 028A. Therefore, the first (for be
Peter Constable wrote,
> Don't forget canonical equivalence (I forgot about this as well): the
> double-width diacritics have a combining class of 234 rather than 230.
> This means that 0251 0361 0302 028A is canonically equivalent to 0251
> 0302 0361 028A. Therefore, the first (for better or wo
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of James Kass
> Hmmm. Further on the inside-out rule. Note the following pairs, which
> are supposed to be in UTF-8:
>
> aÌ"Ì^ aÌ^Ì"
> uÌ"Ì^ uÌ^Ì"
[Why isn't UTF-8 coming through as such?]
> The first "a" with combiners isn't
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On
> Behalf Of James Kass
> > Not sure what you are saying here or what you mean by the inside-out
> rule.
> > The two sequences are canonically equivalent and should look
identical.
>
> The "inside-out" rule is explained and illustrated on pag
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Even with OpenType experimental support here, my display looks like
the GIF you sent. I'll try fixing this,
Um, good luck. I am not sure it is possible to correctly position
double-diacritics with OpenType logic. Specifically, the vertical position
of the double-diacri
> The "inside-out" rule is explained and illustrated on page 125 (TUS 4.0).
>
> An "a" followed by combining umlaut followed by combining macron
> is not the same as "a" plus combining macron plus combining umlaut.
Hmmm. Further on the inside-out rule. Note the following pairs, which
are
On Jun 11, 2004, at 6:44 AM, Andrew C. West wrote:
Depite the oft-mentioned cutesy Hong Kong race horse names,
idiosyncratic
invented Han ideographs are a negligible component of the encoded CJK
repertoire. In my opinion there are thousands, possibly tens of
thousands, of
ideographs that should n
Bob Hallissy wrote,
> >Even with OpenType experimental support here, my display looks like
> >the GIF you sent. I'll try fixing this,
>
> Um, good luck. I am not sure it is possible to correctly position
> double-diacritics with OpenType logic. Specifically, the vertical position
> of the do
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
[mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
> Behalf Of James Kass
> > > U+0251 U+0361 U+0302 U+028A as given by
BabelMap+Code2000 (see
> > > attached) is not productively different from U+0251
> > > U+0302 U+0361 U+028A (see attached)...
>
> Following the "inside-ou
On 2004.06.11, 06:25, Doug Ewell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I concede that "Androcles and the Lion" was the only book published
> in Shavian
Check < http://katalogo.uea.org/index.php?inf=5522 > for one more. At
least its last chapter is fully in shavian script; shavian letters are
introduced gr
On 11/06/2004 14:39:48 James Kass wrote:
>-- Original message from "Anto'nio Martins-Tuva'lkin" :
>--
>> On 2004.06.10, 17:11, I wrote:
>>
>> > U+0251 U+0361 U+0302 U+028A as given by BabelMap+Code2000 (see
>> > attached) is not productively different from U+0251
>> > U+03
-- Original message from "Anto'nio Martins-Tuva'lkin" : --
> On 2004.06.10, 17:11, I wrote:
>
> > U+0251 U+0361 U+0302 U+028A as given by BabelMap+Code2000 (see
> > attached) is not productively different from U+0251
> > U+0302 U+0361 U+028A (see attached)...
>
> No
On Fri, 11 Jun 2004 03:04:17 +0100, Michael Everson wrote:
>
> How many people use medieval CJK race-horse-name characters?
>
Actually, the famous Song dynasty female poet Li Qingzhao (1084-c.1151) invented
a board game (da3 ma3 tu2 in Chinese) which involved racing around a course in
which each
D. Starner wrote:
John Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
We must be talking past one another somehow, but I don't understand how.
To represent the text as originally written, I need a digital representation
for each of the characters in it. Since all I want to do is reprint
the book -- I don't
At 07:41 PM 6/10/2004, Kenneth Whistler wrote:
Yes, it's a scare claim. It is trying to bludgeon the committee
I think the verb in question is inappropriate for the occasion and
for this e-mail exchange. Especially when used in the context of
imputing intention of your opponent which is always a ch
"Mike Ayers" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> > > I'm not
> > > even sure you can trust a commissioned font to be
> > installable on the operating
> > > systems of the next few decades.
>
> Font support has only improved with time. What causes you to
> foresee a sharp reversal?
I don't exp
On 2004.06.10, 18:45, Michael Everson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> After a "double" diacritical, any further combining character could
>> take as its base the "pair" of spacing characters "under" the said
>> double diacritical, shouldn't it?
>
> I tried that in TextEdit, which is pretty smart, an
On 2004.06.10, 21:54, Kenneth Whistler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> 9. n's with loops <...> I think PUA, markup, or other arbitrary text
> representational mechanisms are sufficient here.
Hm...
U+023D LATIN SMALL LETTER N WITH RIGHT LOOP
as U+0273 U+302D
U+0240 LATIN SMALL LETTER ENG WITH LEFT
On 2004.06.10, 17:11, I wrote:
> U+0251 U+0361 U+0302 U+028A as given by BabelMap+Code2000 (see
> attached) is not productively different from U+0251
> U+0302 U+0361 U+028A (see attached)...
Now attached. (Both GIFs are identical, byte by byte, though I swear
I made them separately: click the c
On 2004.06.10, 20:50, Asmus Freytag <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> In at least one case I suspect that a character named 'script' was
> actually intended for an *italic* shape.
In principle, all "holes" in the ranges
U+1D434..U+1D49D,
U+1D608..U+1D66F,
U+1D6E2..U+1D755 and
U+1D790..U+1D
On 2004.06.10, 22:35, Asmus Freytag <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> the fact that you are not conversant with mathematical notation, but
> very familiar with linguistic notations, makes you treat these two
> as worlds apart. <...> In that way, both are different from regular
> 'language text'
What i
Michael,
And now you are answering arguments with irrelevancies.
> >But the argument in this particular case hinges on a particular,
> >nonce set of characters.
>
> You use "nonce" very easily.
Nonce: Occurring, used, or made only once or for a special occasion.
You can, of course, quibble tha
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On
Behalf Of Mike Ayers
> Reprinting the book brings with it the potential for its special
> characters to gain currency, even if only in the context of discussing
> the book.
Um, Mike, let's get real. Linguists have had 80 years of opportunity
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On
> Behalf Of Michael Everson
> Mark, come on. Doke's phonetic transcription of !Xung is a set of
> explicit glyphs representing specific sounds, indeed more precisely
> than IPA allows (I don't think IPA specifies a representation for
> retrof
At 18:48 -0700 2004-06-10, Mark Davis wrote:
There are two reasons we might not encode a particular image as a
character. I had said:
Many images are not appropriate for use in plain text, or have too
small a user community.
That is, you need to have something that is appropriate for use in plai
At 18:10 -0700 2004-06-10, Kenneth Whistler wrote:
But the argument in this particular case hinges on a particular,
nonce set of characters.
You use "nonce" very easily.
We have this one scholar, who invented a bunch of characters in the
20's to represent click sounds that nobody was doing justice
n't want to encode that either!
Mark
__
http://www.macchiato.com
â à â
- Original Message -
From: "Michael Everson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thu, 2004 Jun 10 17:00
Subject: Re: Bantu cl
Title: RE: Bantu click letters
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> Behalf Of Mark Davis
> Sent: Thursday, June 10, 2004 3:35 PM
> The Prince glyph, on-beyond-zebra
> characters, the images on
> images on http://www.aperfectworld.org/animals.htm, et
> > Simply because some images appear in some
> > documents does not mean that they automatically should be
> > represented as encoded
> > characters.
>
> These aren't images. They're clearly letters; they occur in running texts and
> represent
> the sounds of a spoken language.
Well, I agree
At 15:34 -0700 2004-06-10, Mark Davis wrote:
This argument does not hold water. Simply because some images appear
in some documents does not mean that they automatically should be
represented as encoded characters. Many images are not appropriate
for use in plain text, or have too small a user c
> But Gutenberg may not care: they mostly (now exclusively?) publish texts
> in the public domain.
We publish anything previously published we can get permission on, but since
we can't afford to pay for anything, we're primarily public domain. In any
case, we have decades of the Reports of the Bu
Mark
__
http://www.macchiato.com
â à â
- Original Message -
From: "D. Starner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thu, 2004 Jun 10 13:46
Subject: Re: Bantu click letters
> John Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> w
At 16:24 -0400 2004-06-10, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Asmus Freytag scripsit:
That doesn't mean that we stop asking all the hard questions, but that we
allow a presumption of usefulness for characters that were in demonstrated
use over some time and by several authors.
I quite agree. Here, howeve
> Simply because some images appear in some
> documents does not mean that they automatically should be represented as encoded
> characters.
These aren't images. They're clearly letters; they occur in running texts and represent
the sounds of a spoken language. If I were transcribing them, I would
In light of Ken's reply it's probably not worthwhile going into the details
on all points of your answer. However there are a few points were, like
John, I feel you and I are simply talking past each other. Let me pick just
one item:
At 01:07 PM 6/10/2004, Michael Everson wrote:
In any case --
Michael Everson scripsit:
> Unless one contacted whomever it is who owns "Bantu Studies" and
> simply *asked*.
Carfax (part of the Taylor and Francis Group).
Here's contact information:
Reprints, permissions + electronic rights
Joanne Nerland
Taylor & Francis
PO Box 2562 Solli
N-0202 O
At 13:35 -0800 2004-06-10, D. Starner wrote:
>> Due to the latest US copyright extensions, it will take us a couple
>> decades, but we'll want to transcribe this article.
>
In 2050. I wouldn't worry about it.
It's 95 years from publication, so it's 2022. In any case, it's
entirely likely that
> From: Asmus Freytag [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> However, sometimes we have single citations where
> we don't believe (for other reasons) that they are the only existing
> ones, just the only ones found so far.
True; I did mention that possibility at some point.
> Then there is the issue bro
D. Starner scripsit:
> There's at least a small user community; those people who are actively
> transcribing old works, like Project Gutenberg. Due to the latest US
> copyright extensions, it will take us a couple decades, but we'll want
> to transcribe this article.
In 2050. I wouldn't worry ab
At 12:08 PM 6/10/2004, Michael Everson wrote:
At 11:53 -0700 2004-06-10, Asmus Freytag wrote:
It was understood that the mathematical symbols were not to be used in
language text.
What was understood is that if you need a run of text in a script font
you wouldn't use these characters, but would u
At 01:04 PM 6/10/2004, Peter Constable wrote:
> That doesn't mean that we stop asking all the hard questions, but that
we
> allow a presumption of usefulness for characters that were in
demonstrated
> use over some time and by several authors.
But it is precisely that status that is called into que
John Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> We must be talking past one another somehow, but I don't understand how.
> To represent the text as originally written, I need a digital representation
> for each of the characters in it. Since all I want to do is reprint
> the book -- I don't need to use
At 16:21 -0400 2004-06-10, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> You don't KNOW that. You assert that. This is the "adversarial" style
I was objecting to, John. Could you please take this on board?
Fair enough, Michael. But the burden of going forward with the evidence
is still yours. (I'll do what I can.
> > Due to the latest US
> > copyright extensions, it will take us a couple decades, but we'll want
> > to transcribe this article.
>
> In 2050. I wouldn't worry about it.
It's 95 years from publication, so it's 2022. In any case, it's entirely likely
that some commercial organization will licen
At 12:38 -0800 2004-06-10, D. Starner wrote:
"Peter Constable" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
If
> the small n with left loop is not accepted, it will be because it was a
> proposal that never gained currency and has no user community.
There's at least a small user community; those people who are a
At 16:21 -0400 2004-06-10, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> HETA is on my to-do list. Isn't ANTISIGMA the GREEK CAPITAL REVERSED
LUNATE SIGMA that's under ballot?
Yes, except these letters are Latin letters (indeed, letters used to
write the Latin language). You if anyone should be against unifying th
Asmus Freytag scripsit:
> That doesn't mean that we stop asking all the hard questions, but that we
> allow a presumption of usefulness for characters that were in demonstrated
> use over some time and by several authors.
I quite agree. Here, however, we have (as far as the evidence goes) a
si
"Peter Constable" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
> If
> the small n with left loop is not accepted, it will be because it was a
> proposal that never gained currency and has no user community.
There's at least a small user community; those people who are actively
transcribing old works, like Project
Michael Everson scripsit:
> You don't KNOW that. You assert that. This is the "adversarial" style
> I was objecting to, John. Could you please take this on board?
Fair enough, Michael. But the burden of going forward with the evidence
is still yours. (I'll do what I can.)
> But it is QUITE an
> From: Asmus Freytag [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Any notation for a highly specialized subject would always tend to
suffer
> from a very small number of participants. This is not a-priori a
reason to
> force this notation into private use.
Just to clarify: I have not at any point contended that
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf
> Of Asmus Freytag
> As a matter of basic parity, I just don't
> see why we take such great pains to standardize extremely rare forms
of Han
> ideographs, but baulk at supporting our own writing system and its
> extensions equally faith
At 12:50 -0700 2004-06-10, Asmus Freytag wrote:
That's a statement, not an argument. Nor does it address my
contention that the phonetic extensions (all of them) that are
styled Latin characters are in fact equivalent to mathematical usage
in that in both cases you have a letter form that carrie
At 03:47 AM 6/10/2004, Michael Everson wrote:
At 00:11 -0400 2004-06-10, Ernest Cline wrote:
> [Original Message]
From: Michael Everson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Practice your tongue-twisting.
Proposal to add Bantu phonetic click characters to the UCS
http://www.evertype.com/standards/iso10646/pdf/n
At 07:00 AM 6/10/2004, John Cowan wrote:
(LATIN LETTER OWL, indeed.)
This is an interesting symbol as a fairly similar symbol is used in Japan
to annotate phone numbers - if I correctly understand those that have a
taped message or automated response system.
We don't have a symbol for the latter
At 12:08 PM 6/10/2004, Peter Constable wrote:
> From: Asmus Freytag [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Any notation for a highly specialized subject would always tend to
suffer
> from a very small number of participants. This is not a-priori a
reason to
> force this notation into private use.
Just to clar
At 12:15 -0700 2004-06-10, Asmus Freytag wrote:
Over time, I'm becoming more supportive of Michael's stance of
inclusiveness in that direction. As a matter of basic parity, I just
don't see why we take such great pains to standardize extremely rare
forms of Han ideographs, but baulk at supportin
At 07:46 AM 6/10/2004, John Cowan wrote:
To represent the text as originally written, I need a digital representation
for each of the characters in it. Since all I want to do is reprint
the book -- I don't need to use the unusual characters in interchange --
the PUA and a commissioned font seem ju
At 13:50 -0400 2004-06-10, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Michael Everson scripsit:
You have a weird view of the history of phonetics, John. You haven't
addressed the substantive issue: these are Latin characters used to
represent sounds which in 1925 could not easily be represented.
And never have b
At 11:32 -0700 2004-06-10, Peter Constable wrote:
We're talking about the same group of languages. I believe they use
similar orthographies.
> Also: What about upper case forms?
The uppercase of !xhosa is !Xhosa. Uppercase versions of phonetic
symbols are a concern only if the phonetic symbols ga
At 11:53 -0700 2004-06-10, Asmus Freytag wrote:
It was understood that the mathematical symbols were not to be used
in language text.
What was understood is that if you need a run of text in a script
font you wouldn't use these characters, but would use markup. But if
you needed an isolated, out
It was understood that the mathematical symbols were not to be used in
language text.
What was understood is that if you need a run of text in a script font you
wouldn't
use these characters, but would use markup. But if you needed an isolated,
out of
context shape, where the font style has se
Any notation for a highly specialized subject would always tend to suffer
from a very small number of participants. This is not a-priori a reason to
force this notation into private use. One of our goals in this direction
would be to enable publishers to support online editions of a large number
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf
> Of Anto'nio Martins-Tuva'lkin
> Something else: What is the usual spelling for these phonemes in
> today's orthography? Clicks in Xhosa and Zulu are spelt nowadays with
> usual Latin letters (c, q, x etc.).
We're talking about the sa
On 2004.06.10, 11:47, Michael Everson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> answered:
>> Why wouldn't U+1D4AC MATHEMATICAL SCRIPT CAPITAL Q work for the
>> script capital Q? At the very least I feel that should be
>> explained.
>
> It was understood that the mathematical symbols were not to be used
> in language t
Michael Everson scripsit:
> You have a weird view of the history of phonetics, John. You haven't
> addressed the substantive issue: these are Latin characters used to
> represent sounds which in 1925 could not easily be represented.
And never have been represented thus since. In their day, t
At 17:11 +0100 2004-06-10, Anto'nio Martins-Tuva'lkin wrote:
What about U+0251 U+0361 U+0302 U+028A ? After a "double" diacritical,
any further combining character could take as its base the "pair" of
spacing characters "under" the said double diacritical, shouldn't it?
I tried that in TextEdit, wh
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf
> Of Michael Everson
> I have an offprint of Doke's article in Bantu Studies. We have noted
> that 70 years later Pullum and Ladusaw cite a word (the word
> stretchedc-h-utildecaronbelow-triangularcolon chu:) in Doke's
> orthography. I
On 2004.06.10, 03:28, Michael Everson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Proposal to add Bantu phonetic click characters to the UCS
> http://www.evertype.com/standards/iso10646/pdf/n2790-clicks.pdf
On page 10, Michael askes:
> UTC advice as to the correct encoding of these sequences would be
> welcome
On 2004.06.10, 15:14, John Wilcock <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> it seems to me that this information could be important for the
> proposal
Something else: What is the usual spelling for these phonemes in
today's orthography? Clicks in Xhosa and Zulu are spelt nowadays with
usual Latin letters (c,
Peter Constable scripsit:
> Would you consider these too idiosyncratic?
No. The "idio-" in "idiosyncratic" has to do with an individual.
I forgot to point this out earlier, but !Xu phonology isn't idiosyncratic
either -- it's just unusual. To the !Xu it's the normal thing.
--
Is a chair finel
Patrick Andries a écrit :
Michael Everson a écrit :
Practice your tongue-twisting.
Proposal to add Bantu phonetic click characters to the UCS
http://www.evertype.com/standards/iso10646/pdf/n2790-clicks.pdf
:-P
Are these letters used in any other book than Doke's book on Kalahari
Bushmen ?
P. A.
Michael Everson scripsit:
> > > Effort and expense was made to cut the letters for the publication.
> >
> >And today, if I were reprinting it, I'd commission a digital font
> >(your effort, my expense) and put the characters in the PUA.
>
> Not if you wanted, as an Africanist, to be able to repre
At 08:51 -0700 2004-06-10, Patrick Andries wrote:
Not if you wanted, as an Africanist, to be able to represent the
text as it was originally written.
Could you please explain this, how would using PUA characters
prevent the text to be represented as it was originally written ?
What would the valu
At 07:00 -0700 2004-06-10, Peter Constable wrote:
What about Bell's Visible Speech?
They're on our list. As are i.t.a and the Phonotypy characters. I'll
bring a lovely Phonotypic text with me to Toronto.
--
Michael Everson * * Everson Typography * * http://www.evertype.com
At 08:36 -0700 2004-06-10, Peter Constable wrote:
Don't you think the fact that P&L don't show them might suggest that, in
fact, authors today *don't* particularly use them?
Not necessarily. Indeed, they do quote the name chu: with STRETCHED
C, and with both diacritics, the TILDE for nasalization
Michael Everson a écrit :
At 10:00 -0400 2004-06-10, John Cowan wrote:
And today, if I were reprinting it, I'd commission a digital font
(your effort, my expense) and put the characters in the PUA.
Not if you wanted, as an Africanist, to be able to represent the text
as it was originally written.
At 11:00 -0400 2004-06-10, John Cowan wrote:
Michael Everson scripsit:
Although Pullum and Ladusaw don't show the glyphs, they refer
specifically to Doke's characters (s.v. ///). They describe them as
"ad hoc" which I suppose the were, in 1925, though "novel" would
do as well as they aren't ent
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On
> Behalf Of Michael Everson
> >Of course, it's an empirical question as to whether anyone else in
that
> >era did, in fact, adopt any of these symbols, or whether authors
today
> >ever use them (e.g. in citing Doke, whose work was of some imp
At 10:46 -0400 2004-06-10, John Cowan wrote:
We must be talking past one another somehow, but I don't understand how.
To represent the text as originally written, I need a digital representation
for each of the characters in it. Since all I want to do is reprint
the book -- I don't need to use the
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On
> Behalf Of Michael Everson
> You don't know whether or not they were only used in a single
> document. You know only that I *own* that single document. You are
> declaring the characters guilty until proved innocent. That's
> antagonistic.
Peter Constable wrote:
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On
Behalf Of John Cowan
[T]he Unicode Standard does not encode idiosyncratic,
personal, novel, or private use characters [...].
What about Bell's Visible Speech? (I'm sure I've seen it discussed here
on on
Michael Everson scripsit:
> Although Pullum and Ladusaw
> don't show the glyphs, they refer specifically to Doke's characters
> (s.v. ///). They describe them as "ad hoc" which I suppose the were,
> in 1925, though "novel" would do as well as they aren't entirely
> arbitrary and they weren't "
At 07:11 -0700 2004-06-10, Peter Constable wrote:
If no other author uses them, then I think it's not unreasonable to
suggest that they are private-use: Doke puts the terms of the agreement
into his product, his readers enter into that agreement when they decide
to read the book. It is "private-use
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On
> Behalf Of Michael Everson
> The sounds they represent are idiosyncratic and difficult to
> describe, much less write. Personal? No: he published. Novel? Perhaps
> (in 1925); Doke is likely to have devised them. Private use? Be
> serious, Jo
On Thu, 10 Jun 2004 14:30:12 +0100, Michael Everson wrote:
> They were published in Bantu Studies in 1925 in an article by a
> rather important scholar in the field of African linguistics. Effort
> and expense was made to cut the letters for the publication.
But have they been used in other publ
At 10:00 -0400 2004-06-10, John Cowan wrote:
Michael Everson scripsit:
They were published in Bantu Studies in 1925 in an article by a
rather important scholar in the field of African linguistics.
We don't encode characters according to the clout of the user, or
the Apple logo would have been in
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On
> Behalf Of John Cowan
> [T]he Unicode Standard does not encode idiosyncratic,
> personal, novel, or private use characters [...].
What about Bell's Visible Speech? (I'm sure I've seen it discussed here
on on qalam, but I've no r
Michael Everson scripsit:
> They were published in Bantu Studies in 1925 in an article by a
> rather important scholar in the field of African linguistics.
We don't encode characters according to the clout of the user, or
the Apple logo would have been in Unicode long since. :-)
> Effort and
At 09:26 -0400 2004-06-10, John Cowan wrote:
[T]he Unicode Standard does not encode idiosyncratic,
personal, novel, or private use characters [...].
Whatever may have been done in the past, I don't think that one
document is enough to support the introduction of new Latin letters;
t
Michael Everson scripsit:
> Proposal to add Bantu phonetic click characters to the UCS
> http://www.evertype.com/standards/iso10646/pdf/n2790-clicks.pdf
[T]he Unicode Standard does not encode idiosyncratic,
personal, novel, or private use characters [...].
Whatever may have been
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On
> Behalf Of Michael Everson
> >I had not proposed ones I know of before now as I expected they'd be
> >about as well received as the two symbols created by Doke that I
> >proposed last summer: the s and z with swash tail (they were not
> >acc
Heh. Of course despite the fact that Doke published in Bantu Studies,
chu: (Kxoe, SIL code XUU) is a Khoisian language. I'll be changing
the title of the document, though for the purposes of discussion, it
would be best not to change the title of this thread.
--
Michael Everson * * Everson Typog
At 00:30 -0700 2004-06-10, Peter Constable wrote:
I had not proposed ones I know of before now as
I expected they'd be about as well received as
the two symbols created by Doke that I proposed
last summer: the s and z with swash tail (they
were not accepted at that time).
Those are also both us
At 00:30 -0700 2004-06-10, Peter Constable wrote:
!! I had not assumed that we would encode symbols attested in single
publications.
I am CERTAIN that we have many characters which were encoded with
only one citation in the proposal.
I know there are several more idiosyncratic phonetic symbols ou
At 00:11 -0400 2004-06-10, Ernest Cline wrote:
> [Original Message]
From: Michael Everson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Practice your tongue-twisting.
Proposal to add Bantu phonetic click characters to the UCS
http://www.evertype.com/standards/iso10646/pdf/n2790-clicks.pdf
Why wouldn't U+1D4AC MATHEMATI
At 23:30 -0400 2004-06-09, Mark E. Shoulson wrote:
On the last page, the word spelled approximately
n®ª? is translated as "to roast" when in fact
that is approximately nwi (with a different n).
the n®ª? word means "bow."
Error corrected. I hadn't submitted the document to WG2 and UTC yet.
--
Mic
1 - 100 of 107 matches
Mail list logo
