Re: [abcusers] New draft special characters

2003-07-23 Thread Bernard Hill
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], Bernard Hill [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes After a week away I'm reading the draft 2.0.0. Doubtless I will have other comments which I will make but simply the special characters: (a) I presume the list is not exhaustive. ie É (Capital E acute) and the like (b) I think

Re: [abcusers] New draft special characters

2003-07-23 Thread I. Oppenheim
On Wed, 23 Jul 2003, Bernard Hill wrote: (a) I presume the list is not exhaustive. ie É (Capital E acute) and the The table only gives a number of examples for each class of supported accents. (b) I think we need a copyright symbol. \C or \OC. The second revision of the 2.0 draft (soon to be

Re: [abcusers] New draft special characters

2003-07-23 Thread Bernard Hill
In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], I. Oppenheim [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes On Wed, 23 Jul 2003, Bernard Hill wrote: (a) I presume the list is not exhaustive. ie É (Capital E acute) and the The table only gives a number of examples for each class of supported accents. (b) I think we need a copyright

Re: [abcusers] New draft special characters

2003-07-23 Thread I. Oppenheim
On Wed, 23 Jul 2003, Bernard Hill wrote: Octal! I've not used that for 30 years, And I'm only 24 years old... I would never have considered it in a PC environment. It reveals the background of the ABC language, I guess... ... but maybe 243 was not a typo: it's the Latin-1 coding (decimal

Re: [abcusers] New draft special characters

2003-07-23 Thread Phil Taylor
Bernard Hill wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], I. Oppenheim [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes Watch out: 156 is decimal, while the number behind the backslash should be the octal code of the character, which is 234 (and _not_ 243, which was a typo!) Octal! I've not used that for 30 years, I would

Re: [abcusers] New draft special characters

2003-07-23 Thread Richard Robinson
On Wed, Jul 23, 2003 at 03:53:41PM +0100, Phil Taylor wrote: Bernard Hill wrote: In message [EMAIL PROTECTED], I. Oppenheim [EMAIL PROTECTED] writes Watch out: 156 is decimal, while the number behind the backslash should be the octal code of the character, which is 234 (and _not_ 243,

Re: [abcusers] New draft special characters

2003-07-23 Thread John Chambers
I. Oppenheim writes: | | (c) Why is £ \243? While I can of course implement it, it makes no | sense. Ascii £ is 156. | From the iso_8859-1 man page: Oct Dec Hex Char Description ... 243 163 A3 £ POUND SIGN ... 251 169 A9 © COPYRIGHT SIGN