Nick,
If you have a lowercase sigma in the middle of the word followed by a
diacritic is it final;
sigma, hacek, some other letter.
Carl
-Original Message-
From: Nick Nicholas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, February 25, 2001 10:53 PM
To: Unicode List
Subject: Re: Help with
Mick,
Maybe in might be clearer to ask if there are any cases where you use the
final sigma form where it is not the last letter in a word. Modern Greek
only.
Carl
-Original Message-
From: Nick Nicholas [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, February 25, 2001 10:53 PM
To: Unicode
Carl Brown asked:
It is final when followed by a hyphen or combining diacritical mark?
Patrick Rourke answered:
Don't know what the Unicode rules are, but the answer is no. The final
sigma form is not used if the sigma is in a medial position in the word
but
at the end of the line (e.g.,
Doug Ewell wrote:
A *script* like Latin or Cyrillic typically has many more
characters than any one language will ever use.
An *alphabet* is, by definition, language-specific.
Hhmmm...
We probably all agree that Chinese, Japanese and Korean share the "CJK
script".
But would you say,
Armenian single-byte character sets contain a character called "Armenian
Eternity Sign" (it looks like a helice or a flower; see it in
http://www.freenet.am/armscii/armcs-006.html).
What is the meaning and usage of this symbol?
How does is map to Unicode? If there is no mapping, was it ever
Sorry for coming back so late on an old issue (29 Jan 2001).
I (Marco Cimarosti) wrote:
Each different positional form of a letter in Arabic, Syriac or Mongolian
is
encoded with the same code point; the rendering engine must select the
proper form. The same problem in Greek and Hebrew has
At 18:33 -0800 2001-02-25, Joel Rees wrote:
And the PUA is already being fairly actively used, which means there is
already a fair amount of extant plain text that is only legible within a
specific context, and the UNICODE standard has no way of approaching it.
And is guaranteed not to, unless
At 01:39 -0800 2001-02-26, Marco Cimarosti wrote:
Armenian single-byte character sets contain a character called "Armenian
Eternity Sign" (it looks like a helice or a flower; see it in
http://www.freenet.am/armscii/armcs-006.html).
What is the meaning and usage of this symbol?
How does is map
At 20:28 -0800 2001-02-25, Patrick T. Rourke wrote:
Don't know what the Unicode rules are, but the answer is no. The final
sigma form is not used if the sigma is in a medial position in the word but
at the end of the line (e.g., when it occurs at the point of hyphenation in
a hyphenated word at
I wrote
- UNIDATA/CJKXREF.TXT ([...]
Errata: I meant UNIDTA/UNIHAN.TXT
Sorry.
_ Marco
On 02/26/2001 03:21:15 AM Marco Cimarosti wrote:
But would you say, following your definition, that the subset of the CJK
Script used to write Mandarin in Mainland China should be called "The
Chinese Simplified *Alphabet*"?
It is a writing system, but not an alphabetic one.
- "Alphabet" is a
On 02/24/2001 04:43:41 PM Richard Cook wrote:
Whence does this terminology derive? Set or Mapping theory?
I learned it in high school algebra.
Anyone
recommend a definitive text?
I have handy the book from a topology course I took that gives definitions:
Munkres, James A. 1975. Topology: A
On 02/25/2001 08:33:32 PM "Joel Rees" wrote:
And the PUA is already being fairly actively used, which means there is
already a fair amount of extant plain text that is only legible within a
specific context, and the UNICODE standard has no way of approaching it.
Yes, Unicode does: if there is
On 02/25/2001 05:16:08 AM "William Overington" wrote:
I am researching a concept that I am hoping to call a uniengine...
The other commands are intended to include a comprehensive set of commands
for certain graphics and other purposes, yet to be essentially a small set
of easily implemented
Marco Cimarosti wrote:
- "Script" is a generic term meaning a writing system of any kind, its
inventory of signs and its orthographic rules.
- "Alphabet" is a specific class of scripts, whose principal characteristic
is that tends to map each sign to one of the language's phonemes.
I
John Cowan wrote:
- "Alphabet" is a specific class of scripts, whose
principal characteristic
is that tends to map each sign to one of the language's phonemes.
I think that should rather be called an "alphabetic script",
e.g. Latin, Greek, Cyrillic.
You are right. I didn't consider
On 02/25/2001 05:16:15 AM "William Overington" wrote:
[snip]
Yet suppose that some organization were to have "Encode Your Character
Here
For Free" with light moderation only and openly stated that the way that
the
organization planned to make a profit were to encode all of the characters
From: Michael Everson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Oh, we've got a *proposal* for Klingon. It does not, however, appear
that it meets the criteria for use as well as Tengwar and Cirth.
Okay, I've finally gotta ask: what are Tengwar and Cirth? Klingon
I've heard of (and wish I
Nick,
If you have a lowercase sigma in the middle of the word followed by a
diacritic is it final;
sigma, hacek, some other letter.
No, sir. And medial sigma-diacritic is far more frequent than a sigma
having a diacritic word-finally.
Nick Nicholas, Thesaurus Linguae Graecae. [EMAIL
At 10:35 -0600 2001-02-26, Ayers, Mike wrote:
From: Michael Everson [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Oh, we've got a *proposal* for Klingon. It does not, however, appear
that it meets the criteria for use as well as Tengwar and Cirth.
Okay, I've finally gotta ask: what are Tengwar and
At 07:25 -0800 2001-02-26, John Cowan wrote:
Marco Cimarosti wrote:
- "Script" is a generic term meaning a writing system of any kind, its
inventory of signs and its orthographic rules.
- "Alphabet" is a specific class of scripts, whose principal characteristic
is that tends to map each sign to
Peter,
that's not correct, either.
A function (by definition) does not leave out any values in its domain (or
it is not well-defined).
If a function maps every point of its domain one-to-one into the codomain,
it is injective.
If a function maps every point of its domain onto the codomain (i.e.
Tengwar and Cirth are the scripts used to write Tolkien's languages:
http://www.dcs.ed.ac.uk/misc/local/TolkLang/fonts/
http://fan.theonering.net/~rolozo/tengwar/tengwar/
http://fan.theonering.net/~rolozo/tengwar/cirth/
http://www.uib.no/People/hnohf/
-Original Message-
From: ext
Nobody doubted the reality of the submission, we all know it is there.
No one is really pushing for it, though.
MichKa
Michael Kaplan
Trigeminal Software, Inc.
http://www.trigeminal.com/
- Original Message -
From: "Dan Kolis" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: "Unicode List" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Michael Everson wrote:
Yes, an alphabet proper is usually the subset of an alphabetic
script. Armenian seems to be the exception, as it is only used for
one language; Georgian, Latin, Cyrillic, Ogham, Runic, and Greek have
been used for other languages.
I miss the other language(s) for
Maybe in might be clearer to ask if there are any cases where you use the
final sigma form where it is not the last letter in a word. Modern Greek
only.
What I described in my first paragraph is the only such instance I'm aware
of (the 19th texts I have in mind were editions of Byzantine
At 18:44 +0100 2001-02-26, Marco Cimarosti wrote:
Michael Everson wrote:
Yes, an alphabet proper is usually the subset of an alphabetic
script. Armenian seems to be the exception, as it is only used for
one language; Georgian, Latin, Cyrillic, Ogham, Runic, and Greek have
been used for
Wait a minute You want to insert this:
ISOMORPHIC BOWL-OF-WRATH SPANNER WITH JEWS HARP ACCOMPANIMENT.
Can't you use instead the existing american equivelent?
"ISOMORPHIC BOWL-OF-WRATH WRENCH WITH JEWS HARP ACCOMPANIMENT"
Should be close enough
Dan
On Mon, Feb 26, 2001 at 07:18:55AM -0800, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 02/24/2001 04:43:41 PM Richard Cook wrote:
Whence does this terminology derive? Set or Mapping theory?
I learned it in high school algebra.
A quick survey around here indicates that OSU doesn't teach it in any
course
A single alphabet of a single language is actually a pretty useless for
anything else than simple testing like "could this string of characters be a
native word in that language". As an example, 'c' is not part of the
Finnish language since no native Finnish word uses it, but as soon as one
At 09:03 -0800 2001-02-26, Michael \(michka\) Kaplan wrote:
Nobody doubted the reality of the submission, we all know it is there.
No one is really pushing for it, though.
It was originally made because there was a Unix or Linux
implementation somewhere. It has been seen and approved by the
The OpenType font format is supported; that means that the OS can read the
files, do *basic* (i.e. 1:1) character-to-glyph mapping, and rasterize the
glyph outlines. This is as much as is involved in supporting plain-vanilla
TrueType fonts, only with additional possibilities for what formats
Oh, and http://www.klingonska.org/piqad/ . Sorry.
--
Nick Nicholas. TLG, UCI, USA. [EMAIL PROTECTED]; www.tlg.uci.edu/~opoudjis
Many among their proselytes had sold their lands and houses to increase
the public riches of the sect --- at the expense, indeed, of their
unfortunate children,
At 07:21 -0800 2001-02-26, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Like it or not, Unicode is the property of the Unicode Consortium and its
members, not ordinary people.
The character set is also the property of the International
Organization for Standardization.
Personally, I think the PUA is a wonderful
qaStaHvIS Mon, 26 Feb 2001 DIS, ghItlh Michael Everson:
implementation somewhere. It has been seen and approved by the
Klingon Language Institute, but it does remain true that most users
of the Klingon language read and write it in its Latin orthography,
although they will use the font for
That anyone could seriously consider adding the Klingon script to Unicode
seems preposterous. Even if someone were to provide an "accurate" script, a
sample font, etc that meets the general requirements of a proposal, the idea
is quite silly. I am surprised that the consortium hasn't simply
On 02/24/2001 02:36:26 PM "Mark Davis" wrote:
The glossary entry for "abstract character", as he points out, was
inherited
from 10646.
"Abstract Character. A unit of information used for the organization,
control, or representation of textual data. (See Definition D3 in Section
3.3, Characters
Let me throw my light weight in with John O'Conner...
It's silly to even consider Klingon for Unicode or 10646. Many members of
both committees know this, and that's why it hasn't moved anywhere in
several years. The question keeps cropping up because that silly proposal
is still "on the
On 02/26/2001 11:53:27 AM dank wrote:
Wait a minute You want to insert this:
ISOMORPHIC BOWL-OF-WRATH SPANNER WITH JEWS HARP ACCOMPANIMENT.
Can't you use instead the existing american equivelent?
"ISOMORPHIC BOWL-OF-WRATH WRENCH WITH JEWS HARP ACCOMPANIMENT"
Should be close enough
On 02/26/2001 03:21:15 AM Marco Cimarosti wrote:
But would you say, following your definition, that the subset of the CJK
Script used to write Mandarin in Mainland China should be called "The
Chinese Simplified *Alphabet*"?
It is a writing system, but not an alphabetic one.
- "Alphabet" is a
On 02/25/2001 08:33:32 PM "Joel Rees" wrote:
And the PUA is already being fairly actively used, which means there is
already a fair amount of extant plain text that is only legible within a
specific context, and the UNICODE standard has no way of approaching it.
Yes, Unicode does: if there is
On 02/24/2001 04:43:41 PM Richard Cook wrote:
Whence does this terminology derive? Set or Mapping theory?
I learned it in high school algebra.
Anyone
recommend a definitive text?
I have handy the book from a topology course I took that gives definitions:
Munkres, James A. 1975. Topology: A
On 02/25/2001 05:16:08 AM "William Overington" wrote:
I am researching a concept that I am hoping to call a uniengine...
The other commands are intended to include a comprehensive set of commands
for certain graphics and other purposes, yet to be essentially a small set
of easily implemented
It was an Asimov story, I think - I should remember for sure, but don't.
But it's too similar in style to his "tell all the Foys on Sortibackenstrete
that I will soon be there" punch line to give it to Clarke.
(Asimov, Azimov, I doubt he'd have cared).
Patrick Rourke
- Original Message
[EMAIL PROTECTED] said:
That anyone could seriously consider adding the Klingon script to Unicode
seems preposterous. Even if someone were to provide an "accurate" script, a
sample font, etc that meets the general requirements of a proposal, the idea
is quite silly. I am surprised that the
From: "Rick McGowan" [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I have said repeatedly over the years, that I will enterain the encoding
of Klingon when the tribble-kissing wimps at the Klingon High Command beam
an armed delegation into a UTC meeting and demand the encoding of their
script. Until then, I see no
On Mon, 26 Feb 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 02/25/2001 08:01:38 PM "Joel Rees" wrote:
I know this has been hashed over time and time again, and the answer has
been handed down as if by edict time and again, but _your_ attitude as
expressed below is taken by many who are not involved as
On Mon, 26 Feb 2001 [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 02/24/2001 04:43:41 PM Richard Cook wrote:
Whence does this terminology derive? Set or Mapping theory?
I learned it in high school algebra.
and you still remember it? my memory for ancient history is not
good. assuming even that i ever
Perhaps the real question is what is the criteria for including or
excluding a fictional script. I have deleted John's mail, but
his criteria applied more broadly than Klingon if I recall.
Should we worry about elvish communication and not Klingon?
Do we apply a business case to fictional
You know this Klingon thing though, might have an unexpected upside. I'm not
sure.
I think theres a good chance if ratified the item could make funny story of
the day globally; you know, evening news style. "Trekkies everywhere applaud
the inclusion of Klingon into Unicode, and effort to make
If it were up to me alone, I would put that proposal in the bin of things
that have been politely refused. The fact that it has not yet gone to the
great bit-bucket in the sky probably reflects the general esteem in which
the gentlebeing who proposed it is held.
Yes, I think we all highly
In Hebrew the exceptions are in abbreviations and foreign words, but they are
not so rare.
The most common ones are when the final Pe is hard, like in Philip.
We have been encoding Hebrew since the 1950's, on punch cards, and the decision
taken then for Hebrew was to have 5 extra letters for
Rick McGowan wrote:
I have said repeatedly over the years, that I will entertain the encoding
of Klingon when the tribble-kissing wimps at the Klingon High Command beam
an armed delegation into a UTC meeting and demand the encoding of their
script. Until then, I see no reason to consider
On Mon, Feb 26, 2001 at 01:02:43PM -0800, Tex Texin wrote:
Perhaps the real question is what is the criteria for including or
excluding a fictional script. I have deleted John's mail, but
his criteria applied more broadly than Klingon if I recall.
Should we worry about elvish communication
At 7:57 AM -0800 2/26/01, Richard Zhang wrote:
Hello, Marco,
Unihan is the official site I think. You can visit www.unihan.com.cn for
more information about this, if you know Chinese :).
If you sign up for cooperation with them, you will get full access to their
database.
No, Unihan is *NOT*
At 12:58 PM -0800 2/26/01, P. T. Rourke wrote:
It was an Asimov story, I think - I should remember for sure, but don't.
But it's too similar in style to his "tell all the Foys on Sortibackenstrete
that I will soon be there" punch line to give it to Clarke.
(Asimov, Azimov, I doubt he'd have
At 10:57 AM -0800 2/26/01, jgo wrote:
Doing complex character-to-glyph mapping involving
the OpenType tables is another matter. My understanding is that the MacOS
can do the former, but cannot yet do the latter.
Well, the Apple folks who should know are on the list, so let's ask them.
At 12:11 26-02-2001 -0800, Rick McGowan wrote:
It's silly to even consider Klingon for Unicode or 10646.
Nah, it's not silly. It's offensive.
Back when I suggested that 'ch' be added to Unicode, I received
a ton of replies why that should not be. That despite the fact
in Slovak 'ch' has a
A brief intro to some algebra terminology (I'm drafting these from memory,
but I don't think there are any oversights as in one of my earlier posts):
I will assume the definition of "set" is understood. Examples will assume
the sets K = { 1, 2, 3 }, L = { a, b}, M = { a, b, c, d }, N = { a, b,
On 02/25/2001 08:01:38 PM "Joel Rees" wrote:
Michael,
I know this has been hashed over time and time again, and the answer has
been handed down as if by edict time and again, but _your_ attitude as
expressed below is taken by many who are not involved as rather arrogant.
Michael and I don't
On 02/24/2001 02:36:26 PM "Mark Davis" wrote:
The glossary entry for "abstract character", as he points out, was
inherited
from 10646.
"Abstract Character. A unit of information used for the organization,
control, or representation of textual data. (See Definition D3 in Section
3.3, Characters
On Mon, Feb 26, 2001 at 02:35:43PM -0800, G. Adam Stanislav wrote:
At 12:11 26-02-2001 -0800, Rick McGowan wrote:
It's silly to even consider Klingon for Unicode or 10646.
Nah, it's not silly. It's offensive.
Back when I suggested that 'ch' be added to Unicode, I received
a ton of
Doug Ewell asked, on this hopelessly wandering thread:
(Is
there an English-language term for the subset of the CJK ideographic script
that is used by a given language, say, Japanese?)
Well, since "kanji" by now has been borrowed into English, at least among
a rather large class of
In a message dated 2001-02-26 10:38:23 Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Wait a minute You want to insert this:
ISOMORPHIC BOWL-OF-WRATH SPANNER WITH JEWS HARP
ACCOMPANIMENT.
Can't you use instead the existing american equivelent?
"ISOMORPHIC BOWL-OF-WRATH
At 07:19 AM 2/26/01, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
On 02/25/2001 05:16:08 AM "William Overington" wrote:
I am researching a concept that I am hoping to call a uniengine...
Not happy with existing embedding technologies? Your codes would
effectively amount to binary data contained within document.
"John H. Jenkins" wrote:
At 7:57 AM -0800 2/26/01, Richard Zhang wrote:
Hello, Marco,
Unihan is the official site I think. You can visit www.unihan.com.cn for
more information about this, if you know Chinese :).
Knowing Chinese is not enough. You and your browser need to know
Simplified
Peter said:
As I indicated above, I think that there is a non-vacuous notion that
merits a specific term for the purposes of discussion, and that that notion
is the one I have been assuming up to now.
And that is (abstract character)1, as I clarified earlier. I agree with
you, Peter, that
Hi all,
I am relatively new to this list and hence this might be a FAQ. But
i could'nt find a valid answer to my problem.
My System architecture:
1: A Web application, written using WebObjects 4.5 and Java (
JDK 1.1.6) on Mac OS X server
2: Oracle 8i DB
At 16:09 26-02-2001 -0800, David Starner wrote:
Bah. Life requires compromise. There are many people working on
Unicode, each with their own reasons. To stop working on Unicode
because someone else finds something a cool idea that you don't is
absurd, especially when that cool idea is going
69 matches
Mail list logo
