At 17:08 -0700 2001-10-08, Rick McGowan wrote:
I saw your examples of these the other day in Greek text. The upper
corners also occur widely. For example, they occur in Kenkyusha's
Pocket Japanese English dictionary (and others) to denote syllabic
stress. They are precisely the same kind
On Mon, 8 Oct 2001 18:32:05 -0700 (PDT), Kenneth Whistler wrote:
This would definitely not work. The problem is that while the CJK
left/right corner brackets are clearly bracketing punctuation, you
have to contend with their other properties as CJK punctuation. Most
systems will default them to
At 08:25 -0400 2001-10-09, From Net Link wrote:
I think the arithmetic set of symbols should be extended with more
parenthesis.
Provide data regarding the use of such parentheses and propose them.
--
Michael Everson *** Everson Typography *** http://www.evertype.com
15 Port Chaeimhghein
Michael Everson responded:
At 08:25 -0400 2001-10-09, From Net Link wrote:
I think the arithmetic set of symbols should be extended with more
parenthesis.
Provide data regarding the use of such parentheses and propose them.
Actually quite a collection of math brackets are currently
If it does not,
can someone kindly suggest a publishing application solution
that does
support this capability? (i.e., Pagemaker, Quark, etc.)
I'm not sure about FrameMaker, but I just ran a test in which I
successfully inserted Japanese, Simplified Chinese, and Traditional
Chinese text
I gave up trying anything else than MS Office products when I have to use many different fonts with Unicode - Publisher 2000 works great for creating printable (.pub) and browser viewable (html) documents, plus I can make presentations in PowerPoint 2000 - all from one original document set,
Because of Unicode's Han unification, I was under the impression that
to get both Traditional Chinese and Simplified Chinese to really look
right would require using different fonts for each. To have different
fonts for the same characters in a single document would seem to
require use and
At 01:43 PM 10/9/01 -0400, Gary P. Grosso wrote:
Because of Unicode's Han unification, I was under the impression that
to get both Traditional Chinese and Simplified Chinese to really look
right would require using different fonts for each. To have different
fonts for the same characters in a
From: Asmus Freytag [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, October 09, 2001 01:02 PM
At 01:43 PM 10/9/01 -0400, Gary P. Grosso wrote:
Because of Unicode's Han unification, I was under the impression that
to get both Traditional Chinese and Simplified Chinese to really look
right
I appreciate these responses. I am certainly not an expert in Han
unification. I am trying to reconcile what John says with what
appears at http://www.unicode.org/charts/unihan.html. For example,
there appear to be stylistic differences, at least, in a character
such as:
At 03:43 PM 10/9/01 -0500, Ayers, Mike wrote:
Oooh - a swing and a miss!
No -- a pretty complete misunderstanding of my posting on your part.
The implication of my statements is that rich text support is required at
least at some level of your architecture as soon as you want to go
11 matches
Mail list logo
