Harold wrote:
> I think what you are seeing is simply a side effect of the way the
> particular sort has been implemented. The algorithm is regarding the
> two spellings as equal so which is output first is irrelevant and
> depends on which was read first.
Ah, yes, I see that now.
> Try putting
Séamas Ó Brógáin wrote:
Here's another interesting question that someone may have an answer to.
Using Openoffice (on Open SUSE Linux), if I sort a list that contains
the words "apple" and "Apple," the word with the lower-case initial
comes first (as I want it to do). If I sort the same list ag
Here's another interesting question that someone may have an answer to.
Using Openoffice (on Open SUSE Linux), if I sort a list that contains
the words "apple" and "Apple," the word with the lower-case initial
comes first (as I want it to do). If I sort the same list again without
changing anyt
jonathon wrote:
I thought that the standards listed some languages as being
excluded from that set of rules.
You can tailor the Unicode Collation Algorithm to fit particular
languages. See http://unicode.org/charts/collation/ for some collations
for particular languages. Note that the OpenOf
Jonathan Kaye wrote:
Sorry for being thick. I suspected this might be a "feature" rather than a
bug. As I'm working on Namibian languages (Nama and Khoekhoegowab,
specifically) this is going to be a problem. "Phonemes" in these languages
are often expressed by digraphs or even trigraphs. They nee
Jim Allan wrote:
> But in the Unicode Collation Algorithm diacritics are only used for
> secondary level sorting. See again http://unicode.org/reports/tr10 .
>
> So the strings aÕ5a, aÔ5g, and aO5z in the Unicode Collation Algorithm
> are first sorted as if each word had no diacritics, which is
Jim Allan wrote:
> But in the Unicode Collation Algorithm diacritics are only used for
> secondary level sorting. See again http://unicode.org/reports/tr10 .
I thought that the standards listed some languages as being
excluded from that set of rules.
> That's what people normally want in sorts,
Jonathan Kaye wrote:
The problem seems clear: the addion of numbers changes the sensitivity of
the sort. If there are no numbers then the characters O, Ô and Õ are
distinct and sorted in the order you gave. If you add a following number
they all merge and the sort is then based on sorting the fo
Jim Allan wrote:
> Jonathan Kaye wrote:
>> I should say that the sort does seem to work on the ascii codes so that
>> higher codes come later in the collating sequence.
>
> The OpenOffice.org sort order for the Latin 1 characters (including
> ASCII characters) is:
>
> ` ´ ^ ¯ ¨ ¸ _ - , ; : ! ¡ ?
Jonathan Kaye wrote:
I should say that the sort does seem to work on the ascii codes so that
higher codes come later in the collating sequence.
The OpenOffice.org sort order for the Latin 1 characters (including
ASCII characters) is:
` ´ ^ ¯ ¨ ¸ _ - , ; : ! ¡ ? ¿ . · ' ' ‚ " « » ( ) [ ] { }
Jim Allan wrote:
>
> I have tried setting all language information to [none] and still cannot
> get Calc to sort by Unicode order. That is, for example, ß sorts as
> though it were ss, ¶ sorts before alphabetic characters, and so forth.
> The symbols À, Á, Â, Ã, Ä, Å, Æ all collate between A and
Jim Allan wrote:
> Jonathan Kaye wrote:
>> Hi all,
>> I don't know whether this is a bug, a feature or an unforseen property of
>> OO sorting. Here's the problem. I am trying to do a sort based strictly
>> on the ascii codes of symbols in a particular column. The problem exists
>> however I define
Jonathan Kaye wrote:
Hi all,
I don't know whether this is a bug, a feature or an unforseen property of OO
sorting. Here's the problem. I am trying to do a sort based strictly on the
ascii codes of symbols in a particular column. The problem exists however I
define the category of the column be it
13 matches
Mail list logo
