Am 2000-10-12 um 3:49 h UTC hat John Hudson geschrieben:
I'm trying to rationalise a strange set of legacy fonts, and have
encountered an odd symbol that I do not recognise. [..]
http://www.tiro.com/transfer/thing.gif
2311 Square Lozenge
Best wishes,
Otto Stolz
Ar 13:36 -0800 2000-10-11, scríobh John Cowan:
In fact, of course, every extant Klingon text can be written with Unicode,
and indeed with ISO 646:1983.
Which has been superceded by ISO/IEC 646:1991.
Michael Everson ** Everson Gunn Teoranta ** http://www.egt.ie
15 Port Chaeimhghein
Ar 19:49 -0800 2000-10-11, scríobh John Hudson:
I'm trying to rationalise a strange set of legacy fonts, and have
encountered an odd symbol that I do not recognise. I've browsed through the
likely Unicode blocks, looking for something similar, but have not found
anything. So, here's a chance for
Ar 02:04 -0800 2000-10-12, scríobh Otto Stolz:
2311 Square Lozenge
Well spotted, Otto, though John's sample looks lots bigger than the itty
bitty SQUARE LOZENGE in the standard.
Michael Everson ** Everson Gunn Teoranta ** http://www.egt.ie
15 Port Chaeimhghein Íochtarach; Baile Átha
John Cowan wrote (in ASCII(tm), by the way):
In fact, of course, every extant Klingon text can be written
with Unicode, and indeed with ISO 646:1983.
Well, it can -- provided that you properly *registered* your copy of
ASCII(tm) (http://www.wholehog.fsnet.co.uk/robert/ascii/), and paid your
Raghu Kolluru wrote:
My email delivery programs works with most of the charsets
but not with
shift_jis.
Here are the steps that I do,
1) I get a text file from Japan which as the content in the
encoded charset.
2) I paste this content in web based UI and store it in SQL server
3) Then I
Am 2000-10-12 um 3:49 h UCT hat John Hudson geschrieben:
I [...] have encountered an odd symbol [..]
http://www.tiro.com/transfer/thing.gif
Am 2000-10-12 um 10:04 h UCT schrieb ich:
2311 Square Lozenge
Am 2000-10-12 um 11:30 h UCT hat Michael Everson geschrieben:
John's sample looks
John The other characters in the font don't provide any context for this
John thing, otherwise I might have had an easier time figuring out what
John it was supposed to be. This glyph was added to a custom font at some
John point in its history because somebody needed it at the
There are just too many place where things can go wrong. The first place to
start is SQL server which is not a multi-lingual data base unless you use
Unicode. The other concern that I have is how it the charset being
detected? If shift_jis is not being detected the DBCS_Lead byte is
different
At 03:09 AM 10/12/2000 -0800, Michael Everson wrote:
Well, John, it might be helpful if I could see the other characters in the
font, as this might put the character in context. Having said that, I don't
recognize this particular one, but it reminds me of a symbol which can be
used to
Yup, I think Otto is right... Just nodding my agreement with the trend...
2311 Square Lozenge
Best wishes,
Otto Stolz
Attached are two files.
mail_sample_shift_jis.txt is the one I got from Japan. I pasted the content
in a html form (the browser is IE 5.5 and the encoding set is default which
is Western European (Windows)).
My java servlet takes it as any other form name, value pair and dumps in a
unicode
Ar 07:34 -0800 2000-10-12, scríobh Otto Stolz:
John's sample looks lots bigger than the itty bitty SQUARE LOZENGE
in the standard.
Thus sayeth the Scripture:
Character images shown in the code charts are not prescriptive.
In actual fonts, considerable variations are to be expected.
sorry for responding to an old thread - comment below.
markus
Chris Pratley wrote on 2000-oct-03:
Surrogate support was not turned on by default in Win2000 because the
Windows team was waiting for the standard to be finalized. It was also added
late, so to reduce the potential impact they had
Markus,
I assume that Chris was referring to the fact that there were not yet
surrogate pairs (language tags notwithstanding) that were defined until
Boston and Athens.
michka
a new book on internationalization in VB at
http://www.i18nWithVB.com/
- Original Message -
From: "Markus
Title: RE: lag time in Unicode implementations in OS, etc?
Windows 2000 does support surrogates as defined in Unicode 2.0 e.g. it recognizes them when
converting to/from UTF-8 OpenType recognizes new cmap types for surrogates.
The remaining steps e.g. fonts that display Ext B and sorting
so, what is there to be turned on and off in win2k if surrogate pairs are already
handled as single units?
if fonts just don't contain mappings and glyphs for pairs, then the layout engine will
ignore them anyway until fonts provide that data.
markus
John McConnell wrote:
Windows 2000
Cool, I didn't realize Boston and Athens were a pair, much less the first.
Which is the lead surrogate and which is the tail?
;-)
"Michael (michka) Kaplan" wrote:
Markus,
I assume that Chris was referring to the fact that there were not yet
surrogate pairs (language tags notwithstanding)
Title: RE: lag time in Unicode implementations in OS, etc?
It's primarily for the display. There's a small performance hit for the surrogate processing that we weren't willing to impose on everyone given that there were no glyphs yet.
-Original Message-
From: Markus Scherer
Hi all,
In the version of the unihan.txt file distributed with Unicode 3.0, there
is an undocumented field called "kJHJ" with a few thousand records. What
does this refer to?
Thomas Chan
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Title: Re: Microsoft Office 2001 Mac
At 9:08 AM -0700 10/11/00, John Jenkins wrote:
On Tuesday,
October 10, 2000, at 11:54 PM, Edward Cherlin
wrote:
Extended Roman
Unicode Hex
Are you sure about these two? You should only
be able to get to them if you're TSM-savvy and ask for Unicode input,
21 matches
Mail list logo
