On 16/03/2004 17:47, Mark E. Shoulson wrote:
...
Of course Celtic uncial fonts will have appeal only to a limited
market. But you shouldn't have to respell your words when the font
changes (as you would if Irish went to dotless-i, since when printed
in conventional fonts, it does have a dot
Michael Everson [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
At 21:42 +0100 2004-03-16, Antoine Leca wrote:
Also, Michael, tell us if your name when written inside some Irish text,
should it be considered English, or Irish? Then, should the i be dotted?
My name should be written with U+0069 as has been stated
From: Mark E. Shoulson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Peter Kirk wrote:
On the other hand, the change to Unicode required for Irish to use
dotless i would be rather trivial, simply adding Irish to the existing
list currently consisting of Turkish and Azeri, to which Tatar,
Bashkir, Gagauz, Karakalpak
At 02:04 -0800 2004-03-17, Peter Kirk wrote:
Or just use the accursed American Uncial, if there's a version of it
which supports more than Windows 1252.
It would not be suitable for Turkish, given its inherent ugliness.
--
Michael Everson * * Everson Typography * * http://www.evertype.com
Dear all,
The discussions, esp. the one on dotless i brought a question up my mind:
Why doesn't capital J have a dot above?
Actually, my feeling is that as a kid, I used to put a dot on top of J during
elementary school in Turkey. But as I stated in the subject I am investigating. I need
to
On 17/03/2004 03:16, Michael Everson wrote:
At 02:04 -0800 2004-03-17, Peter Kirk wrote:
Or just use the accursed American Uncial, if there's a version of it
which supports more than Windows 1252.
It would not be suitable for Turkish, given its inherent ugliness.
If I come across Turks or
On 17/03/2004 04:20, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Dear all,
The discussions, esp. the one on dotless i brought a question up my mind:
Why doesn't capital J have a dot above?
Actually, my feeling is that as a kid, I used to put a dot on top of J during
elementary school in Turkey. But as I stated in
Well, in the event that Unicode ever does add DOTTED J to go with
DOTLESS J, I sincerely hope that it does not follow the example of
DOTTED I and DOTLESS I. It would have been better in my opinion
to have encoded upper and lower case forms of both characters
separate from the ordinary I. That
A dotted capital J can already be encoded as J, combining dot above.
Hence, a separate precomposed such character will not be added.
/kent k
Well, in the event that Unicode ever does add DOTTED J to go with
DOTLESS J, I sincerely hope that it does not follow the example of
DOTTED I and
Ernest Cline ernestcline at mindspring dot com wrote:
It would have been better in my opinion to have encoded upper and
lower case forms of both characters separate from the ordinary I.
That would have placed language specific burdens not on the casing
algorithm of Unicode but on the transfer
But if you lowercased that, surely you'd get j, combining dot above.
How should that be rendered?
-Original Message-
From: Kent Karlsson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
A dotted capital J can already be encoded as J, combining dot above.
Hence, a separate precomposed such character will
On 17/03/2004 07:12, Ernest Cline wrote:
Well, in the event that Unicode ever does add DOTTED J to go with
DOTLESS J, I sincerely hope that it does not follow the example of
DOTTED I and DOTLESS I. It would have been better in my opinion
to have encoded upper and lower case forms of both
--
+~+
Mahesh T. Pai, LL.M.,
'NANDINI', S. R. M. Road,
Ernakulam, Cochin-682018,
Kerala, India.
Arcane Jill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But if you lowercased that, surely you'd get j, combining dot above.
How should that be rendered?
This is already addressed: lowercase j is soft-dotted meaning that its default
dot disappears when there's a diacritic above it, and this includes the
combining
Microsoft Aims to Double Windows Language Versions
Tue Mar 16, 4:39 PM ET
Reuters to My Yahoo!
By Reed Stevenson
SEATTLE (Reuters) - Microsoft Corp. launched on Tuesday a program to create versions
of Windows and its other programs in little spoken languages such as Amharic, Catalan,
On 17/03/2004 09:59, Philippe Verdy wrote:
Arcane Jill [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
But if you lowercased that, surely you'd get j, combining dot above.
How should that be rendered?
This is already addressed: lowercase j is soft-dotted meaning that its default
dot disappears when there's a
[Original Message]
From: Peter Kirk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
On 17/03/2004 07:12, Ernest Cline wrote:
Well, in the event that Unicode ever does add DOTTED J to go with
DOTLESS J, I sincerely hope that it does not follow the example of
DOTTED I and DOTLESS I. It would have been better in my
Peter Kirk suggested rhetorically:
Dare I suggest that this would give a way of writing Turkish
with a Celtic font?
What I need, however, is a way of writing Japanese with a
Mongolian font. ;-)
--Ken
On 17/03/2004 11:30, Ernest Cline wrote:
...
Mixed Turkish and other European language documents that are without
language markup have the same problem, no matter where the burden
is placed. Some I's will receive inappropriate glyphs when a casing rule
is applied. The problem is just as
- Original Message -
From: Peter Kirk [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: Philippe Verdy [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Cc: Unicode Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sent: Wednesday, March 17, 2004 8:11 PM
Subject: Re: Investigating: LATIN CAPITAL LETTER J WITH DOT ABOVE
On 17/03/2004 09:59, Philippe Verdy wrote:
What is Unicode in Finnish is now online
thanks to Jarkko Hietaniemi.
Check it out at http://www.unicode.org/standard/translations/finnish.html
---
Magda Danish
Administrative
Director
The
Unicode Consortium
650-693-3921
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
Anyone knows how to install fonts for the following published translations:
Amharic, Blin, Tigrigna
It would be useful, on the list of translations, to display which script they
use...
And where one can find fonts to display them.
Other translations do not cause such problems, as the fonts
Dear list subscribers,
Is there anyone interested in taking on the project of turning the
Uyghur translation page - referred to in James Kass' email below - into
nominal forms of Arabic characters rather than presentation forms?
Thanks,
Magda
Begin forwarded message:
-Original
Chuig: Unicode Mailing List [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Scríobh Carl W. Brown [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Marion,
What exactly are you proposing? A glyph change so that the glyphs for
normal dotted I be rendered without the dot, or that Irish be added to the
list of languages that uses the dotless I such as
Marion Gunn wrote...
I do know my language is being badly served, however.
And I would conclude, given the discussion we've seen on this list, that
your language isn't being badly served by the Unicode Standard (or any
other character encoding), but by some fonts and their vendors.
You
[skipping past various grandiloquence...]
Having worked so hard (sweating long years at other sources of income) to
fund the price of developing fonts and attending mtgs to define not just
individual 10646/Unicode characters, but whole character blocks within
10646/Unicode, plus a series of
At 00:20 + 2004-03-18, Marion Gunn wrote:
I do know my language is being badly served, however.
The Irish language is in no way badly served by the Unicode
Standard or by ISO/IEC 10646.
Some Unicode oldtimers may recall the 'Irish long s' debate (before your
time, Jon), when, finally
Marion,
That particular campaign was such a resounding 'success' we went on to
spend thousands of quid each year, for many years, trekking one more
encoding campaign trail after another, in support of many other languages,
as well as our own.
It reminds me of my work on a multi-lingual
28 matches
Mail list logo
