Kenneth Whistler kenw at sybase dot com wrote:
But I challenge you to find anything in the standard that
*prohibits* such sequences from occurring.
I've learned that this question of illegal or invalid character
sequences is one of the main distinguishing factors between those who
truly
At 15:18 -0700 2003-08-06, Kenneth Whistler wrote:
As someone or other said, I believe that hitherto -- *hitherto,* mark
you -- [we have] entirely overlooked the existence of, well, scripts
that might cause a conflict between these esteemed principles.
The reason why the UTC should tackle the
Kenneth Whistler scripsit:
Is a right-to-left script encoded in visual order in
the backing store or in phonetic (= logical) order?
I've always thought this term visual order was productive of
nothing but confusion. I realize that there's precedent in the
8859-x RFCs for its use, but
Mark Davis scripsit:
Where did you get the notion that space is not a base character? And
base characters include those that are not control or format
characters. Space is neither one.
Unfortunately, p. 88 of TUS3.0 (section 4.5, paragraph 3) says
Zs, Zl, and Zp [characters] are considered
John C asked...
I would like to ask the old farts^W^Wrespected elders of the UTC
which principle they consider more important, abstractly speaking:
the principle that combining marks always follow their base characters
(a typographical principle), or that text is stored, with a few minor
I was so glad that you got things so nearly right for once, and then
you go and spoil it with:
Another similar case would be the use of a isolated nukta (which
normally modifies a following base character): the sequence
nukta, SPACE
Like all other combining characters, NUKTA follows the
Canonical reordering is scoped to stop at combining class = 0.
(I know it is. But I confess I'm not sure why.)
Because God, er, um... Mark Davis created it that way. ;-)
Eeh, not really the answer I expected. This particular behaviour makes
(marginal!) sense for
On 06/08/2003 16:12, John Jenkins wrote:
On Wednesday, August 6, 2003, at 3:53 PM, Peter Kirk wrote:
This answer presupposes that there is a well-defined concept of which
base character a combining mark belongs to. That is not always true.
The particukar combining mark which precipitated the
On Thursday, August 07, 2003 2:40 AM, Doug Ewell [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Kenneth Whistler kenw at sybase dot com wrote:
But I challenge you to find anything in the standard that
*prohibits* such sequences from occurring.
I've learned that this question of illegal or invalid character
On 07/08/2003 10:38, John Cowan wrote:
Miikka-Markus Alhonen scripsit:
Anyone interested in preparing an encoding proposal?
This is awfully marginal, it seems to me, not so much because of the colors
(which are letter features, like crossbars, bowls, etc. in other scripts),
but because
10 matches
Mail list logo
