On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 1:05 AM, Whistler, Ken wrote:
> The two currently relevant documents are:
> Draft repertoire for FDAM2 of ISO/IEC 10646:2012 (3rd edition) (WG2 N4458):
> http://www.unicode.org/L2/L2013/13150-n4458.pdf
> and
> Draft additional repertoire for ISO/IEC 10646:2014 (4th edition)
Hello,
|It is a false economy for a general Unicode library implementation
|to be overly clever about how it compresses tables, such as casing
|tables. That approach can get you into trouble when something else is
|added to the standard which breaks your initial assumptions.
oh no, i'm not ma
Steffen,
FYI, Unicode 7.0, when it comes out, will have another entire
bicameral (casing) script added to it: Warang Citi. And when
Old Hungarian is finally published, at some point after Unicode 7.0,
that will be *another* bicameral script added. It is unlikely that those
two will be the last. An
On 12 Sep 2013, at 11:26, Johan Winge wrote:
> According to the autobiography of André Weil, quoted at
> http://jeff560.tripod.com/set.html, the empty set symbol ∅ was inspired by
> the Scandinavian Ø, and would then have nothing to do with the Greek phi,
> except for a superficial resemblance
I confess I usually type a Danish Ø for convenience when I'm
using this, though for publication I would tend to substitute
the proper ∅.
Whenever I saw the empty set symbol in printed math literature in
Germany, it closely resembled Ø; I don't think I ever saw a
stru
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 01:21:28PM +0100, Neil Harris wrote:
> On 12/09/13 11:26, Johan Winge wrote:
> >On Wed, 11 Sep 2013 20:29:51 +0200, Hans Aberg
> > wrote:
> >
> >>... The symbol for the empty set ∅ is originally a Greek letter
> >>phi ϕ, ans some use the latter.
> >
> >According to the autob
Talking about which ...
I confess I usually type a Danish Ø for convenience when I'm using this, though
for publication I would tend to substitute the proper ∅.
Whenever I saw the empty set symbol in printed math literature in
Germany, it closely resembled Ø; I don't think I ever saw a
struck-
Le 12/09/2013 14:21, Neil Harris a écrit :
On 12/09/13 11:26, Johan Winge wrote:
On Wed, 11 Sep 2013 20:29:51 +0200, Hans Aberg
wrote:
... The symbol for the empty set ∅ is originally a Greek letter phi
ϕ, ans some use the latter.
According to the autobiography of André Weil, quoted at
ht
On 12/09/13 11:26, Johan Winge wrote:
On Wed, 11 Sep 2013 20:29:51 +0200, Hans Aberg
wrote:
... The symbol for the empty set ∅ is originally a Greek letter phi
ϕ, ans some use the latter.
According to the autobiography of André Weil, quoted at
http://jeff560.tripod.com/set.html, the empty
Steffen "Daode" Nurpmeso wrote:
|I have been able to compress all lower-, upper- and titlecase
|mappings, simple and extended (no conditions yet) of Unicode 6.2
|into a 260 entry binary search array.
Aaeh, to clarify this -- this thing covers the simple mappings (if
any; i.e., there may be onl
I have been able to compress all lower-, upper- and titlecase
mappings, simple and extended (no conditions yet) of Unicode 6.2
into a 260 entry binary search array.
I'm not with this project at the moment, but looking at the
alloc/Pipeline.html it *could* be that those few characters alone
will add
2013/9/12 Michael Everson
> On 12 Sep 2013, at 09:07, Julian Bradfield
> wrote:
> No, just theta. The bizarrely-names Latin ʊ is already in use by the
> Association.
>
I wonder when the IPA will start borrowing new symbols from Cyrillic,
Coptic, Cherokee, or even from Hebrew (Aleph is already w
On Wed, 11 Sep 2013 20:29:51 +0200, Hans Aberg wrote:
... The symbol for the empty set ∅ is originally a Greek letter phi ϕ,
ans some use the latter.
According to the autobiography of André Weil, quoted at
http://jeff560.tripod.com/set.html, the empty set symbol ∅ was inspired by
the Sca
On 2013-09-12, Michael Everson wrote:
> On 12 Sep 2013, at 09:07, Julian Bradfield wrote:
>> Interesting. I see that disunification of the remaining IPA greek letters is
>> proceeding by stealth -
>
> No, Julian. It's by design. Only theta remains.
Hm, that's not what the comments in some of t
On 12 Sep 2013, at 09:07, Julian Bradfield wrote:
> On 2013-09-11, Whistler, Ken wrote:
>
> [ lots ]
>
> Thank you for that explanation!
>
>> Draft additional repertoire for ISO/IEC 10646:2014 (4th edition) (WG2 N4459)
>> http://www.unicode.org/L2/L2013/13151-n4459.pdf
>
> Interesting. I se
On 9/12/2013 1:36 AM, Gerrit Ansmann wrote:
On Thu, 12 Sep 2013 06:50:23 +0200, Charlie Ruland ☘
wrote:
One final remark: Thinking about it I have the impression that the
blackletter vs. antiqua distinction once made in German very much
resembles that made between Hiragana and Katakana in Ja
On Thu, 12 Sep 2013 06:50:23 +0200, Charlie Ruland ☘
wrote:
One final remark: Thinking about it I have the impression that the blackletter
vs. antiqua distinction once made in German very much resembles that made
between Hiragana and Katakana in Japanese. In both cases the underlying systems
On 2013-09-11, Whistler, Ken wrote:
[ lots ]
Thank you for that explanation!
> Draft additional repertoire for ISO/IEC 10646:2014 (4th edition) (WG2 N4459)
> http://www.unicode.org/L2/L2013/13151-n4459.pdf
Interesting. I see that disunification of the remaining IPA greek
letters is proceeding
On 9/11/2013 9:50 PM, Charlie Ruland ☘ wrote:
One final remark: Thinking about it I have the impression that the
blackletter vs. antiqua distinction once made in German very much
resembles that made between Hiragana and Katakana in Japanese. In both
cases the underlying systems of the correspon
On September 12, 2013 Richard Wordingham wrote:
On Wed, 11 Sep 2013 12:57:34 +0200
Charlie Ruland ☘ wrote:
Andreas,
linguistically speaking (i.e. following the tradition that was
started by Ferdinand de Saussure) when items are used contrastively
they must be considered different linguistic ent
On Thu, Sep 12, 2013 at 3:17 AM, Michel Suignard wrote:
> So you need both versions, the draft repertoire to have these references, and
> the ballot text to have new characters in context.
Thanks to all the WG2 experts for their explanations.
But still, when you people post the copies of the ab
On Tue, 10 Sep 2013 19:48:18 +0100
Michael Everson wrote:
> On 10 Sep 2013, at 19:38, Kent Karlsson
> wrote:
>
> > I would agree, and in addition,
> > AB3E;LATIN SMALL LETTER BLACKLETTER O WITH STROKE;Ll;0;L;N;
> > should have a compatibility decomposition to
> > 00F8;LATIN SMALL LETTER
On Wed, 11 Sep 2013 12:57:34 +0200
Charlie Ruland ☘ wrote:
> Andreas,
> linguistically speaking (i.e. following the tradition that was
> started by Ferdinand de Saussure) when items are used contrastively
> they must be considered different linguistic entities on what has
> been called the “emic”
David Starner asked:
> Would it be possible to post links to the next ballots like these on
> this list so that we can comment on them when they're live? It's a lot
> harder to discuss them without actual links to the proposals or actual
> ballots (more then just the names).
Well, technically, no
Just to add a tiny bit to the very good explanation by Ken, the draft for the
ballot texts are sometimes also included in the Unicode registry. ISO adds some
head pages but otherwise the content is the same as the official ISO documents.
There are always in the WG2 web site which is not protect
On 9/11/2013 1:13 PM, Michael Everson wrote:
Nonsense. And blackletter isn't identical to Fraktur.
>It is not different enough to base a character encoding distinction on it. Why don't we code
"times" and "garamond" shapes then as characters as well.
"The Mathematical Alphanumeric Symbols blo
On 9/11/2013 5:56 AM, Gerrit Ansmann wrote:
That’s correct, but that did not seem to stop people from using a long
s in Antiqua from time to time. There are a lot of post-1901 Antiqua
display fonts that contain a long s as well as examples from normal
text. This very rarely happens even today:
nicode.org; Whistler, Ken
Subject: Posting Links to Ballots (was: RE: Why blackletter letters?)
David Starner asked:
> Would it be possible to post links to the next ballots like these on
> this list so that we can comment on them when they're live? It's a lot
> harder to d
On 11 Sep 2013, at 19:32, Asmus Freytag wrote:
> On 9/10/2013 12:09 PM, Michael Everson wrote:
>> On 10 Sep 2013, at 20:04, Asmus Freytag wrote:
>>
>>> The proper thing would be to deprecate these accidental duplications
>>> forthwith.
>> Nonsense. And blackletter isn't identical to Fraktur.
>
On 9/10/2013 12:09 PM, Michael Everson wrote:
On 10 Sep 2013, at 20:04, Asmus Freytag wrote:
The proper thing would be to deprecate these accidental duplications forthwith.
Nonsense. And blackletter isn't identical to Fraktur.
It is not different enough to base a character encoding distinct
On 10 Sep 2013, at 21:04, Asmus Freytag wrote:
> On 9/10/2013 11:05 AM, Michael Everson wrote:
>> On 10 Sep 2013, at 18:01, Asmus Freytag wrote:
>>
>>> This rationale is absent in document WG2 N3907 that requests these
>>> characters.
>>>
>>> Therefore, it seems these two additions should not
David,
Please see the pipeline page and links Ken mentioned at
http://www.unicode.org/alloc/Pipeline.html - the document registry is now
available for perusal.
-s
El miércoles, 11 de septiembre de 2013, David Starner escribió:
> On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 11:34 AM, Whistler, Ken
> wrote:
> > Thos
Am 11.09.2013 14:56, schrieb Gerrit Ansmann:
Your page draws my attention to "ſch". To typeset this as "ſ ch" in
circumstances where spacing-out (positive tracking; German:
"gesperrt") is used for emphasis has always irritated me, but I guess
that's just how it's mostly been done ... do you hav
On Wed, 11 Sep 2013 13:13:12 +0200, Stephan Stiller
wrote:
Your page draws my attention to "ſch". To typeset this as "ſ ch" in circumstances where spacing-out
(positive tracking; German: "gesperrt") is used for emphasis has always irritated me, but I guess that's just
how it's mostly been do
Even though this is slightly off-topic:
Thanks a bunch, Gerrit, for the latest versions of UnifrakturMaguntia,
UnifrakturCook-Regular and UnifrakturCook. I have dealt with hundreds
and maybe thousands of fonts, yet these are the only truly Unicode
compatible blackletter fonts I’ve seen so far
Hi Gerrit,
I have been aiming at creating a blackletter font
(http://unifraktur.sourceforge.net/maguntia.html)
Cool!
• The four “required” ligatures ch, ck, ſt and tz, which were never
separated in typesetting. These can be realised in the very same way
as antiqua ligatures.
Your page draws
Andreas,
linguistically speaking (i.e. following the tradition that was started
by Ferdinand de Saussure) when items are used contrastively they must be
considered different linguistic entities on what has been called the
“emic” level: phonemes, morphemes, graphemes, etc. As /gebrochene
Schrif
First of all, I am afraid that fraktur and blackletter get mixed up. So just
that everybody talks about the same things:
• Fraktur: the predominant typeface for the German language from the 16th
century until 1941, which has also been used by many other languages for
roughly the same time perio
Am 11.09.2013 um 11:48 schrieb Charlie Ruland ☘:
> gebrochene Schrift in general — and what you call “modern Latin” must be
> considered different scripts
No they must not. Supposed, you mean “script” in the sense of “writing system”.
Then you would have to consider minuscule a different script
I wasn’t referring to the use of one or the other script throughout a
text, but to the habit of mixing them according to semantics within a
single sentence.
Charlie
On 11 September 2013 schrieb Steffen Daode Nurpmeso wrote:
Charlie Ruland ␦ wrote:
|There is also a functional/semantic reas
Charlie Ruland ␦ wrote:
|There is also a functional/semantic reason why /Fraktur/ — or rather
|/gebrochene Schrift/ in general — and what you call “modern Latin” must
[.]
|borrowings. And this meant that two persons called Anne, one from Paris
|and the other one from Berlin, were distingui
There is also a functional/semantic reason why /Fraktur/ — or rather
/gebrochene Schrift/ in general — and what you call “modern Latin” must
be considered different scripts: once it was customary in Germany to use
/gebrochene Schrift/ for anything German and /Antiqua/ for foreign
borrowings. An
On 11 Sep 2013, at 09:20, Otto Stolz wrote:
> E. g., in German fraktur text, there are specific rules for differentiating
> Long S »ſ« from Round S »s«, while in modern Latin text only the Round S has
> been used for decades (the latest Long S in modern Latin German printed text
> I have seen
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 11:34 AM, Whistler, Ken wrote:
> Those characters (along with a thousand others) went through two rounds
> of international balloting during late 2011 and early 2012, and those were
> ballots were the only chances to pull back or modify the approvals. Nobody
> objected
> d
Hello,
am 2013-09-10 um 22:43 Uhr hat Gerrit Ansmann geschrieben:
In contrast to Greek and Coptic (as far as I
understand them), changing a modern text to fraktur is only a change of
the font
This is not so.
Fraktur text is subject to orthographic rules different
from those applying to text i
If this is for German dialectology, then the alphabet needed is too much
incomplete to be usable without usingas well generic letters with
additional out-of-band styling.
We are reaching the point where disunification of the Fraktur script from
the Latin script could occur (just like it occured fo
Ad aburdum ? Not really.
IPA is a well-cntrained environment which does not attempt to reproduce an
orthography or grammatical rules of the language, but only its phonology at
best (using conventional "perceived" equivalences between relized phonemes,
even if there are many exceptions probably in
Yucca asked:
> As far as I can see, the document summarizes an agreement in an ad hoc
> meeting. So it’s not late at all to raise objections, is it?
It is way, way, waaay too late to raise objections for these two.
Those characters are *published* in ISO/IEC 10646:2011 Amendment 1.
They were in
On Tue, Sep 10, 2013 at 1:43 PM, Gerrit Ansmann wrote:
> I do not know much about Greek, Coptic and Georgian, but this seems to me
> that with the same reasoning, you would have to encode Latin small caps
> separately just because some IPA characters (ʙʜʏʀɴɢɪ) are essentially small
> caps.
>
For
On Tue, 10 Sep 2013 20:35:39 +0200, Philippe Verdy wrote:
We are reaching the point where disunification of the Fraktur script from the Latin
script could occur (just like it occured for Coptic from Greek, or between 2 of the
Georgian alphabets), and promote the ISO 15924 "Latf" script as a n
On Tue, 10 Sep 2013 22:55:43 +0200, Markus Scherer wrote:
For use in IPA etc., there are in fact small caps letters:
http://unicode.org/cldr/utility/list-unicodeset.jsp?a=%5B%3Aname%3D%2FSMALL+CAPITAL%2F%3A%5D&g=
For small caps as a style, you would use markup.
I am fully aware of all this.
Den 2013-09-10 19:01, skrev "Asmus Freytag" :
> Good question, Jean-François.
>
> I seem to recall that typographers may make a distinction between
> "black-letter" and "fraktur" forms, but even if they, the differences
> are typographical, not essential. For the purpose of *character*
> encoding
2013-09-10 20:01, Asmus Freytag wrote:
This rationale is absent in document WG2 N3907 that requests these
characters.
If this is document
http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/SC2/wg2/docs/n3907.pdf
then I’m rather confused: it proposes AB51 for LATIN SMALL LETTER
BLACKLETTER O and does not include LATIN
Den 2013-09-10 20:34, skrev "Whistler, Ken" :
> Items listed there in green are still under ballot in ISO, while items
> listed in yellow are not yet in ballot in ISO. For those, input is still
> useful.
>
> If the entry is listed in white, forget it. Those items are already too late
> to impact
On 9/10/2013 11:05 AM, Michael Everson wrote:
On 10 Sep 2013, at 18:01, Asmus Freytag wrote:
This rationale is absent in document WG2 N3907 that requests these characters.
Therefore, it seems these two additions should not have been made.
I disagree. The mathematical characters are not prope
On 10 Sep 2013, at 20:04, Asmus Freytag wrote:
> The proper thing would be to deprecate these accidental duplications
> forthwith.
Nonsense. And blackletter isn't identical to Fraktur.
The proper thing to do is to use the new letters for the linguistic functions
for which they were encoded,
On 10 Sep 2013, at 19:38, Kent Karlsson wrote:
> I would agree, and in addition,
> AB3E;LATIN SMALL LETTER BLACKLETTER O WITH STROKE;Ll;0;L;N;
> should have a compatibility decomposition to
> 00F8;LATIN SMALL LETTER O WITH STROKE;Ll
I don't agree. This is a phonetic letter not a glyph va
2013-09-10 20:36, Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
2013-09-10 20:01, Asmus Freytag wrote:
This rationale is absent in document WG2 N3907 that requests these
characters.
If this is document
http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/SC2/wg2/docs/n3907.pdf
then I’m rather confused: it proposes AB51 for LATIN SMALL LETTE
The rationale is most probably the same for ALL existing mathematical
"letters" : they are the same letters, but their specific encoding is done
so that it explicitly specifies a rendering style which is significant in
mathematical notations, where they are not really letters but formal
symbols wit
On 10 Sep 2013, at 18:01, Asmus Freytag wrote:
> This rationale is absent in document WG2 N3907 that requests these characters.
>
> Therefore, it seems these two additions should not have been made.
I disagree. The mathematical characters are not proper letters, but are symbols
used in mathema
Good question, Jean-François.
I seem to recall that typographers may make a distinction between
"black-letter" and "fraktur" forms, but even if they, the differences
are typographical, not essential. For the purpose of *character*
encoding, one would need to make a very strong rationale for di
Version 7 of Unicode includes the following two letters:
ꬲAB32LATIN SMALL LETTER BLACKLETTER E
ꬽAB3DLATIN SMALL LETTER BLACKLETTER O
There already were the following two:
𝔢1D522MATHEMATICAL FRAKTUR SMALL E
𝔬1D52CMATHEMATICAL FRAKTUR SMALL O
For these, there’s an a
62 matches
Mail list logo
