Re: UTF8E
I think you are referring to the UTF-EBCDIC for EBCDIC platforms: http://www.unicode.org/unicode/reports/tr16/index.html Oracle8i supports UTF-EBCDIC with an Oracle character set name UTFE. Please refer to A-17 of the Oracle8i NLS Guide Release 2 (8.1.6) for details. - Michael [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Hi all, Can some give me the details about the character set UTF8E ?what is it and how exactly it differs from UTF 8? Thanks Regards, Samir Mehrotra, [EMAIL PROTECTED] 091-022-8291020 /0170 extn. (2059)
FW: CJK Width problem [URGENT]
-Original Message-From: Marvin Bertha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2000 3:24 PMTo: Magda Danish (Unicode)Subject: CJK Width problem [URGENT] Dear Magda, Thank you for your help a few days ago. According to your information, I have obtained codepages MS936 (simplied Chinese) MS950 (traditional Chinese) and made a font for some Chinese characters. Glyphs are copies from some existing fonts andmetrics are checked. When typing my font, I have noticed that the cursor stays in the middle of the character for traditional Chinese as follows: For simplied Chinese, only half-width cursor appears, then half character appears, then after RETURN, the cursor stays in the middle of the character. I have copied one of these characters to char 0031 which is numeric "1" under MS Windows 1252 Latin 1. Then the cursor becomes normal when I type "1". I have read the article about CJK Width on your site and found that my characters correctly sit in the Wide zone between 4E00 - 9FA5. Maybe there is something missing on my double-byte encoding. Please advise remedy. Thanks. Yours sincerely, Marvin Wong cjk-1.jpg cjk-2.jpg cjk-4.jpg cjk-3.jpg cjk-5.jpg
Re: FW: CJK Width problem [URGENT]
Please don't send out attachments to the whole list. ME Ar 09:57 -0800 2000-06-26, scríobh Magda Danish (Unicode): -Original Message- From: Marvin Bertha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2000 3:24 PM To: Magda Danish (Unicode) Subject: CJK Width problem [URGENT] Dear Magda, Thank you for your help a few days ago. According to your information, I have obtained codepages MS936 (simplied Chinese) MS950 (traditional Chinese) and made a font for some Chinese characters. Glyphs are copies from some existing fonts and metrics are checked. When typing my font, I have noticed that the cursor stays in the middle of the character for traditional Chinese as follows: For simplied Chinese, only half-width cursor appears, then half character appears, then after RETURN, the cursor stays in the middle of the character. I have copied one of these characters to char 0031 which is numeric "1" under MS Windows 1252 Latin 1. Then the cursor becomes normal when I type "1". I have read the article about CJK Width on your site and found that my characters correctly sit in the Wide zone between 4E00 - 9FA5. Maybe there is something missing on my double-byte encoding. Please advise remedy. Thanks. Yours sincerely, Marvin Wong -Original Message- From: Marvin Bertha [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Thursday, June 22, 2000 3:24 PM To: Magda Danish (Unicode) Subject: CJK Width problem [URGENT] Dear Magda, Thank you for your help a few days ago.According to your information, I have obtained codepages MS936 (simplied Chinese) MS950 (traditional Chinese) and made a font for some Chinese characters. Glyphs are copies from some existing fonts and metrics are checked. When typing my font, I have noticed that the cursor stays in the middle of the character for traditional Chinese as follows: For simplied Chinese, only half-width cursor appears, then half character appears, then after RETURN, the cursor stays in the middle of the character. I have copied one of these characters to char 0031 which is numeric "1" under MS Windows 1252 Latin 1. Then the cursor becomes normal when I type "1". I have read the article about CJK Width on your site and found that my characters correctly sit in the Wide zone between 4E00 - 9FA5. Maybe there is something missing on my double-byte encoding. Please advise remedy. Thanks. Yours sincerely, Marvin WongContent-Type: image/jpeg; name="cjk-1.jpg" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="cjk-1.jpg" Content-ID: 000b01bfdc98$883249c0$[EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Location: ATT-0-D7B00BF0B3CA8E4C9FCBBCBCD0CBFA63-c jk-1.jpg Iatán tiontaithe: Chur:cjk-1.jpg (JPEG/JVWR) (000530A4) Content-Type: image/jpeg; name="cjk-2.jpg" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="cjk-2.jpg" Content-ID: 000c01bfdc98$886c4580$[EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Location: ATT-1-90B855EF5DFABA48A13FF248DB790A16-c jk-2.jpg Iatán tiontaithe: Chur:cjk-2.jpg (JPEG/JVWR) (000530A5) Content-Type: image/jpeg; name="cjk-4.jpg" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="cjk-4.jpg" Content-ID: 000d01bfdc98$8873e6a0$[EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Location: ATT-2-9BAB49CA9D0F9D488FAD8E4F34CE4E63-c jk-4.jpg Iatán tiontaithe: Chur:cjk-4.jpg (JPEG/JVWR) (000530A6) Content-Type: image/jpeg; name="cjk-3.jpg" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="cjk-3.jpg" Content-ID: 000e01bfdc98$8884af80$[EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Location: ATT-3-107D210850F0BD4D9608BAD46B31C5AD-c jk-3.jpg Iatán tiontaithe: Chur:cjk-3.jpg (JPEG/JVWR) (000530A7) Content-Type: image/jpeg; name="cjk-5.jpg" Content-Disposition: attachment; filename="cjk-5.jpg" Content-ID: 000f01bfdc98$888dd740$[EMAIL PROTECTED] Content-Location: ATT-4-FF80EB56C1F67C4E971A762B0DB2E95A-c jk-5.jpg Iatán tiontaithe: Chur:cjk-5.jpg (JPEG/JVWR) (000530A8)
RE: Gender symbols
I have sometimes wondered why these two useful, pre-existing symbols are not used in the U.S. to denote 'male' and 'female' on e.g. restroom doors. One possibility is that, because they are frequently associated with 'sexuality' A more likely explanation is that they are almost never used in everyday life, except perhaps by people composing pamphlets about gender issues, and thus they aren't as widely recognized or associated with one's own gender as the words "men" and "women", or symbols depicting stereotypical dress/body shapes. I mean, how many people reading the Weekly World News tabloid in the checkout line at your local supermarket are going to see those symbols on a door and identify with them, not just know what they mean if you quizzed them about it?
RE: Gender symbols
Doug Ewell wrote: I have sometimes wondered why these two useful, pre-existing symbols are not used in the U.S. to denote 'male' and 'female' on e.g. restroom doors. One possibility is that, because they are frequently associated with 'sexuality' or 'relations between the sexes,' they are somehow felt to be inappropriate for other types of male/female distinctions like restrooms and locker rooms. It may not make much sense, but after all, we are talking about American customs. Perhaps, it means that average Americans are too much learned in astronomy (or astrology), and cannot dissociate these symbols from the Solar System's planets Mars and Venus. Or that they are too fond in classical culture, and cannot dissociate them from the Roman gods called by the same names (the god of war and the goddess of love, respectively). Moreover, the Venus symbol is very associated with Women's Liberation movement, and we all know the allergy of American for politically marked things. _ Marco :-( For the sake of Mars and Venus, I've done it one more time! As everybody else, I am wishing for this mutant off-topic thread to die out but, as many others, I cannot refrain to feed it once in a while :-)
Re: UTF-8N?
At 05:29 AM 6/23/00 -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: Yes. The Unicode Standard will deprecate the use of U+FFEF (Note: not U+FFFE) as a zero-width non-breaking space (despite its formal name). And U+FFEF should *only* be used as a byte order mark and/or signature. (That is already ambiguous and trouble enough -- without tossing in the orthogonal issue of the need for a non-breaking zero-width space.) In my book, this is one of the most egregious recent mistakes by the UTC. Especially in light of the fact that the use of FEFF as ZWNBSP is supported today in widely distributed software - who's going to convert all the data, and what will happen when "programs will feel free to toss out U+FEFF" as someone recently suggested. While well-intentioned, it is essentially 'moving' a character, by moving the semantics to a new character code. To balance the scale of my previous remarks: An even more egregious mistake was made by WG2 by not accepting U+FEFF as a byte order mark, but insisting on a then dubious ZWNBSP name and semantics. Such is life. A./
