RE: Concise term for non-ASCII Unicode characters

I agree, although I note that sometimes the additional (redundant) specificity of "non-7-bit-ASCII characters" is needed when talking to people unclear on what "ASCII" means. Addison > -Original Message- > From: Unicode [mailto:unicode-boun...@unicode.org] On Behalf Of Peter >

Re: Concise term for non-ASCII Unicode characters

Hello Sean, On 2015/09/20 23:48, Sean Leonard wrote: What is the most concise term for characters or code points So we already have two different things we might need a term for. outside of the US-ASCII range (U+ - U+007F)? Sometimes I have referred to these as "extended characters"

Obituary for Adrian Frutiger

http://www.nytimes.com/2015/09/20/arts/design/adrian-frutiger-dies-at-87-his-type-designs-show-you-the-way.html For more than 50 years, Adrian Frutiger made the world legible. A type designer who died on Sept. 10 at 87 in his native Switzerland, Mr. Frutiger created some of the most widely

Concise term for non-ASCII Unicode characters

What is the most concise term for characters or code points outside of the US-ASCII range (U+ - U+007F)? Sometimes I have referred to these as "extended characters" or "non-ASCII Unicode" but I do not find those terms precise. We are talking about the code points U+0080 - U+10. I

Re: Concise term for non-ASCII Unicode characters

Exactly. I think the reason that non-ASCII feels non-concise is that there is widespread confusion between ASCII and Latin-1/ISO 8859-1 (which in turn is widely confused with Windows-1252). -steve Sent from my iPhone > On Sep 20, 2015, at 10:05 AM, Phillips, Addison

RE: Concise term for non-ASCII Unicode characters

You already have been using "non-ASCII Unicode", which is about as concise and sufficiently accurate as you'll get. There's no term specifically defined in any standard or conventionally used for this. Peter -Original Message- From: Unicode [mailto:unicode-boun...@unicode.org] On

RE: Concise term for non-ASCII Unicode characters

Well, if the point is to refer to characters that would require two or more code units in UTF-8, then _accurate_ expressions would be, "Unicode characters beyond the Basic Latin block" or "Unicode characters above U+007F". Peter -Original Message- From: Steve Swales

Re: Concise term for non-ASCII Unicode characters

Le dimanche, 20 septembre 2015 à 18:59, Steve Swales a écrit : > Exactly. I think the reason that non-ASCII feels non-concise is that there is > widespread confusion between ASCII and Latin-1/ISO 8859-1 (which in turn is > widely confused with Windows-1252). For this reason I usually use the