-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
"Michael (michka) Kaplan" wrote:
> Not sure how this could be generally possible to restrict, since
> WinNT/2K/XP/.Net all will transparently map CF_TEXT an CF_UNICODETEXT so
> that if one if put on the clipboard and the other is asked for, you will get
> it. "S
wrote:
> A couple of corrections. First, if an app supports only WM_CHAR and
> not also WM_UNICHAR, that does not imply that it uses a legacy
> encoding. If running on NT/2K/XP and registered as a wide (Unicode)
> app, the WM_CHAR messages will supply UTF-16 code units. If running
> on Win9x/Me
On 08/31/2002 04:50:48 PM "Doug Ewell" wrote:
>> Of course, one limitation is that apps can alter
>> the data before they put it on the clipboard; in fact, an app might
>> opt to convert everything to some default codepage and put only that
>> on the clipboard.
>
>It would make sense for a Unico
al Message -
From: "Doug Ewell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Cc: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Saturday, August 31, 2002 5:01 PM
Subject: Re: Revised proposal for "Missing character" glyph
> I wrote:
>
> > It would make sense for a U
I wrote:
> It would make sense for a Unicode-specific tool such as this to only
> accept data in WM_UNICHAR format, not WM_CHAR. Unicode data in
> WM_CHAR format is pretty much guaranteed to have gone through some
> conversion step.
Well, duh. Of course I meant CF_UNICODETEXT and CF_TEXT, not
wrote:
> Something that wouldn't be difficult would be an item that copied data
> to the clipboard, and then displayed character info based on the
> clipboard content.
Hmm, an interesting thought. I would be willing to write a mini-tool
like this, if enough people let me know (on- or off-line)
On 08/28/2002 05:38:05 PM "Doug Ewell" wrote:
>Edit controls (edit boxes, text widgets) in Windows already come
>equipped with a right-click menu...
>It's not hard to imagine that menu being extended with a "Character
>Info" or "What's This Glyph?" item...
>Of course, I have no idea if such a t
Doug Ewell wrote the following at 8:38 AM on Wed, Aug 28, 2002:
>But the advantage would be the same as what Dean
>envisions for a font-based solution -- applications would get the
>support "for free," instead of having to re-implement it in multiple,
>slightly different ways.
I don't believe so
Dean Snyder wrote:
> Good idea - the big attraction being extensibility. But a detraction
> is that it would typically mean multiple, or at least explicit,
> deployment at the application level on any given platform. (I'm
> presuming such a system service would present an optional API to
> appli
Kenneth Whistler wrote the following at 2:01 PM on Mon, Aug 26, 2002:
>And an approach which strikes me as a much more useful and extensible
>way to deal with this would be the concept of a "What's This?"
>text accessory. Essentially a small tool that a user could select
>a piece of text with (th
At 09:49 PM 8/26/2002 -0400, John Cowan wrote:
>Nowadays, experts can detect mismatched character sets from the
>nature of the byte barf that appears on their screen.
And super-experts can read languages in "byte barf" as it is not random!
Barry Caplan
http://www.i18n.com
Behalf Of Kenneth Whistler
> Sent: Monday, August 26, 2002 2:01 PM
> To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Revised proposal for "Missing character" glyph
>
>
> [Resend of a response which got eaten by the Unicode email
> during the system mainten
Kenneth Whistler scripsit:
> Things will be better-behaved when applications finally get past the
> related but worse problem of screwing up the character encodings --
> which results in the more typical misdisplay: lots of recognizable
> glyphs, but randomly arranged into nonsensical junk. (Ah,
William,
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> Behalf Of William Overington
> Sent: Friday, August 23, 2002 12:55 AM
> To: James Kass; Carl W. Brown; Unicode List
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Revised proposal for &quo
[Resend of a response which got eaten by the Unicode email
during the system maintenance last week. Carl already responded
to me on this, but others may not have seen what he was
responding to. --Ken]
> Proposed unknown and missing character representation. This would be an
> alternate to metho
TECTED]; [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Revised proposal for "Missing character" glyph
>
>
> > Proposed unknown and missing character representation. This would be an
> > alternate to method currently described in 5.3.
> >
> > The missing or unknown char
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
"Carl W. Brown" wrote:
> Proposed unknown and missing character representation. This would be an
> alternate to method currently described in 5.3.
>
> The missing or unknown character would be represented as a series of
> vertical hex digit pairs for each byte
Proposed unknown and missing character representation. This would be an
alternate to method currently described in 5.3.
The missing or unknown character would be represented as a series of
vertical hex digit pairs for each byte of the character. BMP characters
would be represented with 4 hex di
18 matches
Mail list logo
