John Cowan commented.
William Overington scripsit:
It seems to me that deprecating these language tags might be a bad thing
as
the language tags could well have potential use in plain text files on
the
DVB-MHP (Digital Video Broadcasting - Multimedia Home Platform) platform
in
order to
Unicode captures the ice-age during the global warming era!
Do we have codepoints for images found on the walls of caves?
:)
CRO-MAGNON PAINTING HUMAN SPEARING A MAMMOTH
CRO-MAGNON PAINTING MAMMOTH STOMPING A HUMAN
...
Hi Friends,
I have to display Unicode on RIchEdit control of VB6. Can you help me how to display the unicode in VB application . If possible give me the references and links.
Thanks
Nandlal
Do you Yahoo!?
HotJobs - Search new jobs daily now
-Original Message-
From: Marco Cimarosti [mailto:marco.cimarosti;essetre.it]
Sent: den 28 oktober 2002 16:23
To: 'Kent Karlsson'; Marco Cimarosti
Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: RE: Character identities
Kent Karlsson wrote:
For this reason it is quite impermissible to render
William Overington scripsit:
Oh, that is interesting. So what exactly is the public consultation about
deprecating the plane 14 language tags about? If the Unicode Technical
Committee decided to deprecate the plane 14 language tags, what would be the
effect of that decision?
Deprecated in
No links to give, just a note to warn you
that VB itself converts text that it puts into the RichEdit control from Unicode
when it assigns the text.
Technically the control supports Unicode
since its interfaces are Unicode. but this conversion does limit the text that
can be supported.
Doug Ewell wrote as follows.
[snip]
Right off the bat, though, I thank the UTC for initiating this public
review process which allows non-members like me to get their two cents
in regarding Unicode policies. (Hmm, two American-specific figures of
speech in one sentence -- perhaps it should have
At 06:30 + 2002-10-29, William Overington wrote:
Readers interested in internationalization using Unicode might like to know
that I have recently added some documents about the comet circumflex system
to the web.
Well I'll be gobsmacked. What supreme piffle. And set in SIZE=5 too.
See with
At 23:21 -0800 2002-10-28, Barry Caplan wrote:
Do we have codepoints for images found on the walls of caves?
No. The closest we come to that is wondering about the Tartaria
proto-script, which we haven't readmapped.
--
Michael Everson * * Everson Typography * * http://www.evertype.com
Kent Karlsson wrote:
The claim was that dieresis and overscript e are the same
in *modern*
*standard* German. Or, better stated, that overscript e is
just a glyph
variant of dieresis, in *modern* *standard* German typeset
in Fraktur.
Well, we strongly disagree about that then. Marc
William Overington WOverington at ngo dot globalnet dot co dot uk
wrote:
I do note however that review 3 refers to a document which is only
available to Unicode Consortium members, which seems a strange thing
if views of interested individuals are being sought.
I agree.
Also, it is a pity
Marco,
Standard orthography, and orthography that someone may
choose to use on a sign, or in handwriting, are often not
the same.
And I did say that current font technologies (e.g. OT)
does not actually do character to character mappings,
but the net effect is *as if* they did (if, and I
At 05:29 10/29/2002, William Overington wrote:
Also, it is a pity that this new era of Unicode glasnost (displayed with a
ligature? :-) ) comes so shortly after the last Unicode Technical
Committee meeting the minutes of which state the consensus about no more
ligatures being added to the
Kent Karlsson wrote:
Marco,
Keld, please allow me to begin with the end of your post:
Marco, please calm down and reread every sentence of my
previous message. You seem to have misread quite a few things,
but it is better you reread calmly before I try to clear
up any remaining
Standard orthography, and orthography that someone may
choose to use on a sign, or in handwriting, are often not
the same.
If someone's writes an a-umlaut, no matter what it looks,
it should be encoded as an a-umlaut. That's the identity
of the character they wrote. I'm sure my German teacher
At 21:07 +0100 2002-10-29, Marco Cimarosti wrote:
I'm sure Michael would agree too (at least I hope so), and many others.
There are many Michaels and many others here... If any of them wish to
intervene, I hope they'll rather say something new to take the discussion
out of the loop, rather
Michael asked:
My eyes have glazed over reading this discussion. What am I being
asked to agree with?
Here's the executive summary for those without the time to
plow through the longer exchange:
Marco: It is o.k. (in a German-specific context) to display
an umlaut as a macron (or a
At 13:27 -0800 2002-10-29, Kenneth Whistler wrote:
Michael asked:
My eyes have glazed over reading this discussion. What am I being
asked to agree with?
Here's the executive summary for those without the time to
plow through the longer exchange:
Marco: It is o.k. (in a German-specific
At 21:07 +0100 2002-10-29, Marco Cimarosti wrote:
I'm sure Michael would agree too (at least I hope so), and many others.
There are many Michaels and many others here... If any of them wish to
intervene, I hope they'll rather say something new to take the discussion
out of the loop, rather
At 15:56 -0600 2002-10-29, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is it complaint with Unicode to have a font where a-umlaut has a glyph of
a with e above? What about a glyph of a-macron (e.g. a handwriting
font for someone who writes a-umlaut that way)?
Of course it is. Glyphs are informative.
--
Michael
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 09:07:16PM +0100, Marco Cimarosti wrote:
Kent Karlsson wrote:
Marco,
Keld, please allow me to begin with the end of your post:
I really have not contributed much to this thread, I think you mean
Kent.
Best regards
keld
Elaine Keown
Univ Massachusetts Amherst
Hello all:
Small Hebrew (Neo-Aramaic, Judeo-Tat, etc.)
proposal ready for comments at given URL.
Not finished, first viewing--Elaine
At 14:56 10/29/2002, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Is it complaint with Unicode to have a font where a-umlaut has a glyph of
a with e above? What about a glyph of a-macron (e.g. a handwriting font
for someone who writes a-umlaut that way)?
Yes, I would say that it is compliant with Unicode because
[EMAIL PROTECTED] scripsit:
Small Hebrew (Neo-Aramaic, Judeo-Tat, etc.)
proposal ready for comments at given URL.
Not finished, first viewing--Elaine
First cut:
HEBREW ACCENT COMBINING VERTICAL LINE: probably OK
HEBREW ACCENT ZINNORIT: probably OK
HEBREW ACCENT MAYELA: probably OK (names
At 16:34 10/29/2002, John Cowan wrote:
HEBREW MARK LOWER DOT: not needed, use generic U+0323 COMBINING DOT BELOW
I'm generally in agreement with John about using generic combining marks
when possible. From a font development perspective this can sometimes
create problems in multilingual
Do we again need an intelligent font that understands language tagging?
This should be achievable with OpenType, no?
Do we now have different flavors of Unicocde, one for English, one for
Icelandic, one for French, one for German ... ?
In most of the cases described be you, you can still have
On Tue, Oct 29, 2002 at 08:53:59PM -0500, Jim Allan wrote:
Using the Unicode method makes far more sense than creating fonts that
work for particular languages only, provided no foreign words or names
appear, or which require language tagging.
Why does the Unicode method exclude creating
27 matches
Mail list logo
