On 2017-04-12, Philippe Verdy via Unicode wrote:
> 2017-04-12 8:35 GMT+02:00 Martin J. Dürst :
>> On Go boards, the grid cells are definitely rectangular, not square. The
>> reason for this is that boards are usually looked at at an angle, and
>>
On 2017-04-22, Eli Zaretskii via Unicode wrote:
>> From: Richard Wordingham via Unicode
[...]
>> I've encountered the problem that, while at least I can search for
>> text smaller than a cluster, there's no indication in the window of
>> where in the
On 2018-01-26, Richard Wordingham via Unicode wrote:
> Some systems (or admins) have been totally defeated by even the ASCII
> version of ʹO’Sullivanʹ. That bodes ill for Kazakhs.
The head (about to be ex-head) of my university is Sir Timothy O'Shea.
On the student record
On 2018-08-11, Charlotte Buff via Unicode wrote:
> There is no semantic difference between a softball and a baseball. They are
> literally the same object, just in slightly different sizes. There isn’t a
> semantic difference between a squirrel and a chipmunk either (mainly
> because they don’t
On 2018-08-20, Mark E. Shoulson via Unicode wrote:
> Moreover, they [William's pronoun symbols] are once again an attempt to
> shoehorn Overington's pet
> project, "language-independent sentences/words," which are still
> generally deemed out of scope for Unicode.
I find it increasingly hard
On 2018-10-31, Marcel Schneider via Unicode wrote:
> Preformatted Unicode superscript small letters are meeting the French
> superscript
> requirement, that is found in:
> http://www.academie-francaise.fr/abreviations-des-adjectifs-numeraux
> (in French). This brief article focuses on the
On 2018-10-30, James Kass via Unicode wrote:
> (Still responding to Ken Whistler's post)
> Do you know the difference between H₂SO₄ and H2SO4? One of them is a
> chemical formula, the other one is a license plate number. T̲h̲a̲t̲ is
> not a stylistic difference /in my book/. (Emphasis
On 2018-10-30, Marcel Schneider via Unicode wrote:
> Dr Bradfield just added on 30/10/2018 at 14:21 something that I didn’t
> know when replying to Dr Ewell on 29/10/2018 at 21:27:
>> The English abbreviation Mr was also frequently superscripted in the
>> 15th-17th centuries, and that didn't
On 2018-10-31, Janusz S. =?utf-8?Q?Bie=C5=84?= via Unicode
wrote:
> On Mon, Oct 29 2018 at 12:20 -0700, Doug Ewell via Unicode wrote:
[ as did I in private mail ]
>> The abbreviation in the postcard, rendered in
>> plain text, is "Mr".
>
> The relevant fragment of the postcard in a loose
On 2018-11-02, James Kass via Unicode wrote:
> Alphabetic script users write things the way they are spelled and spell
> things the way they are written. The abbreviation in question as
> written consists of three recognizable symbols. An "M", a superscript
> "r", and an equal sign (= two
On 2019-01-21, James Kass via Unicode wrote:
> Consider superscript/subscript digits as a similar styling issue. The
> Wikipedia page for Romanization of Chinese includes information about
> the Wade-Giles system’s tone marks, which are superscripted digits.
>
>
On 2019-01-15, Philippe Verdy via Unicode wrote:
> This is not for Mongolian and French wanted this space since long and it
> has a use even in English since centuries for fine typography.
> So no, NNBSP is definitely NOT "exotic whitespace". It's just that it was
> forgotten in the early stages
On 2019-01-11, James Kass via Unicode wrote:
> Exactly. William Overington has already posted a proof-of-concept here:
> https://forum.high-logic.com/viewtopic.php?f=10=7831
> ... using a P.U.A. character /in lieu/ of a combining formatting or VS
> character. The concept is straightforward and
On 2019-01-12, James Kass via Unicode wrote:
> This is a math formula:
> a + b = b + a
> ... where the estimable "mathematician" used Latin letters from ASCII as
> though they were math alphanumerics variables.
Yup, and it's immediately understandable by anyone reading on any
computer that
On 2019-01-12, Richard Wordingham via Unicode wrote:
> On Sat, 12 Jan 2019 10:57:26 + (GMT)
> Julian Bradfield via Unicode wrote:
>
>> It's also fundamentally misguided. When I _italicize_ a word, I am
>> writing a word composed of (plain old) letters, and then styl
On 2019-01-12, James Kass via Unicode wrote:
> Sounds like you didn't try it. VS characters are default ignorable.
By software that has a full understanding of Unicode. There is a very
large world out there of software that was written before Unicode was
dreamed of, let alone popular.
>
On 2019-01-13, Marcel Schneider via Unicode wrote:
> As far as the information goes that was running until now on this List,
> Mathematicians are both using TeX and liking the Unicode math alphabets.
As Khaled has said, if they use them, it's because some software
designer has decided to use
On 2019-01-14, James Kass via Unicode wrote:
> 퐴푟푡 푛표푢푣푒푎푢 seems a bit 푝푎푠푠é nowadays, as well.
>
> (Had to use mark-up for that “span” of a single letter in order to
> indicate the proper letter form. But the plain-text display looks crazy
> with that HTML jive in it.)
Indeed. But
_Art
On 2019-01-13, James Kass via Unicode wrote:
> यदि आप किसी रोटरी फोन से कॉल कर रहे हैं, तो कृपया स्टार (*) दबाएं।
> What happens with Devanagari text? Should the user community refrain
> from interchanging data because 1980s era software isn't Unicode aware?
Devanagari is an established
On 2019-01-14, James Kass via Unicode wrote:
> Julian Bradfield wrote,
> > I have never seen a Unicode math alphabet character in email
> > outside this list.
>
> It's being done though. Check this message from 2013 which includes the
> following, copy/pasted from the web page into Notepad:
>
>
On 2019-01-27, Michael Everson via Unicode wrote:
> On 27 Jan 2019, at 05:21, Richard Wordingham
> wrote:
>> The closing single inverted comma has a different origin to the apostrophe.
> No, it doesn’t, but you are welcome to try to prove your assertion.
As far as I can tell from the easily
The current bidi discussion prompts me to post a curiosity I received
today.
I ordered something from a (UK) company, and the payment receipt came
via Stripe. So far, so common. The curious thing is that the (entirely
ASCII) company name was enclosed in a left-to-right direction, thus:
Subject:
The celebrated Bosworth-Toller dictionary of Anglo-Saxon uses a
curious diacritic to mark long vowels. It may be described as a long
shallow acute with a small down-tick at the right.
It contrasts with an acute (quite steep in this typeface) used to mark
accented short vowels.
Both can be seen in
On 2019-09-27, David Starner via Unicode wrote:
> On Thu, Sep 26, 2019 at 8:57 PM Fred Brennan via Unicode
> wrote:
[snip]
>> There is no sequence of glyphs that could be logically mapped, unless you're
>> telling me to request that the sequence T B be recommended for general
>> interchange as
On 2020-03-21, Eli Zaretskii via Unicode wrote:
>> Date: Sat, 21 Mar 2020 11:13:40 -0600
>> From: Doug Ewell via Unicode
>>
>> Adam Borowski wrote:
>>
>> > Also, UTF-8 can carry more than Unicode -- for example, U+D800..U+DFFF
>> > or U+11000..U+7FFF (or possibly even up to 2³⁶ or 2⁴²),
25 matches
Mail list logo