On 11/23/2016 10:15 AM, James Kass wrote:
http://patch.com/florida/southtampa/petition-drive-aims-raise-manatee-awareness-adorable-way
If enough people sign the petition, will Unicode add a manatee emoji?
And, how about wolverines and lemmings? Are any petitions underway
for them? How many
James Kass :
>
> And, how about [other emoji]? Are any petitions underway for them?
For what it’s worth, several weeks ago (before UTC149), I collected all emoji
petitions I could find online (and that were in languages I can at least
somewhat decipher). I’m excluding
Leonardo Boiko wrote:
> I support the creation of manatee emoji, but only if it’s accompanied
> by a new modifier for emoji size, coming in the varieties: TINY,
> SMALL, LARGE, HUGE.
>
> This would allow us to say "oh, the [HUGE MANATEE]" in emoji.
Leonardo immediately wins the award for best
I support the creation of manatee emoji, but only if it’s accompanied
by a new modifier for emoji size, coming in the varieties: TINY,
SMALL, LARGE, HUGE.
This would allow us to say "oh, the [HUGE MANATEE]" in emoji.
2016-11-23 13:15 GMT-02:00 James Kass :
>
On 23 November 2016 at 16:39, Ken Whistler wrote:
> On 11/23/2016 7:15 AM, James Kass wrote:
>>
>> How many signatures on a petition would be needed before
>> Unicode would consider adding a non-existent character to the
>> repertoire?
>
> I would say somewhat more than zero
James,
On 11/23/2016 7:15 AM, James Kass wrote:
How many signatures on a petition would be needed before
Unicode would consider adding a non-existent character to the
repertoire?
I would say somewhat more than zero (which could hardly be considered a
petition) and less than 7,466,363,069
http://patch.com/florida/southtampa/petition-drive-aims-raise-manatee-awareness-adorable-way
If enough people sign the petition, will Unicode add a manatee emoji?
And, how about wolverines and lemmings? Are any petitions underway
for them? How many signatures on a petition would be needed
On 23 Nov 2016, at 09:05, Richard Wordingham
wrote:
>
> What is 'line-breaking hyphenation'? In particular, I am trying to determine
> the meaning of the TUS statement 'There is no line-breaking hyphenation'
> referring to the Lanna script at the end of TUS
On 23/11/16 11:45, Daniel Bünzli wrote:
On Wednesday 23 November 2016 at 12:28, Tom Hacohen wrote:
I took a look at the ICU sources, and they explicitly mention this case,
so it seems I was mistaken with interpreting the intention of the UAX. I
still find it confusing, but based on this thread,
On Wednesday 23 November 2016 at 12:28, Tom Hacohen wrote:
> I took a look at the ICU sources, and they explicitly mention this case,
> so it seems I was mistaken with interpreting the intention of the UAX. I
> still find it confusing, but based on this thread, it seems to just be me.
It's not
On 23/11/16 11:20, Philippe Verdy wrote:
2016-11-23 12:00 GMT+01:00 Tom Hacohen >:
Also take another look at
http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr29/#Grapheme_Cluster_and_Format_Rules
2016-11-23 12:00 GMT+01:00 Tom Hacohen :
>
> Also take another look at http://www.unicode.org/reports
> /tr29/#Grapheme_Cluster_and_Format_Rules specifically the table that
> shows another way of writing the ignore rule. This again shows my
> understanding of rule 4 is
On 23/11/16 11:11, Daniel Bünzli wrote:
On Wednesday 23 November 2016 at 12:00, Tom Hacohen wrote:
This looks like a mistake statement rather than a binding rule.
Well at least to me it's pretty clear that this is not the case.
Even if that's true, look at my second statement (which you
You say "theres's no case where two rules apply". I don't think this is
right, rules apply in the precedence order as long as they've not produced
a decision for generating a "break here" or no break here". This is
especially important for rules that generate only a replacement, that are
executed
On Wednesday 23 November 2016 at 12:00, Tom Hacohen wrote:
> This looks like a mistake statement rather than a binding rule.
Well at least to me it's pretty clear that this is not the case.
> Even if that's true, look at my second statement (which you redacted in
> your reply):
I'm not arguing
On 23/11/16 10:52, Daniel Bünzli wrote:
On Wednesday 23 November 2016 at 11:22, Tom Hacohen wrote:
Thank you for your reply, but I don't think the UAX, specifically the
line you quoted implies that. The line you quoted says that the process
is terminated when a rule matches and produces a
On Wednesday 23 November 2016 at 11:22, Tom Hacohen wrote:
> Thank you for your reply, but I don't think the UAX, specifically the
> line you quoted implies that. The line you quoted says that the process
> is terminated when a rule matches and produces a boundary status. In
> Table 1[1], the
On 23/11/16 10:01, Daniel Bünzli wrote:
On Tuesday 22 November 2016 at 13:07, Tom Hacohen wrote:
However, looking at the test case and the UAX[2], this does not look
correct. More specifically, because of rule 4:
ZWJ Extended GAZ -> ZWJ GAZ
And then according to rule 3c, there should be no
On Tuesday 22 November 2016 at 13:07, Tom Hacohen wrote:
> However, looking at the test case and the UAX[2], this does not look
> correct. More specifically, because of rule 4:
> ZWJ Extended GAZ -> ZWJ GAZ
> And then according to rule 3c, there should be no break opportunity
> between them.
You said:
> So ignore it and test whever the last symbols glues with ZWJ (it should,
> so there's no break in the reference implementation).
Which makes me think you misread the example I quoted. There is a break
in the reference implementation, though I argue (like you just did) that
there
What is 'line-breaking hyphenation'? In particular, I am trying to
determine the meaning of the TUS statement 'There is no
line-breaking hyphenation' referring to the Lanna script at the end of
TUS Section 16.7.
One possibility is that it means that visible text does not
distinguish line breaks
21 matches
Mail list logo