Re: Pupil's question about Burmese

2010-11-09 Thread Peter Edberg
Dear Ngwe Tun, The forthcoming ICU 4.6 will include a Burmese locale (using CLDR data), with support for Burmese collation. http://site.icu-project.org/ Best regards, Peter Edberg On Nov 9, 2010, at 2:05 AM, Ngwe Tun wrote: ... We are in dead-lock because without releasing Myanmar

Re: Need for Level Direction Mark

2011-09-18 Thread Peter Edberg
Philippe, On Sep 17, 2011, at 12:54 PM, Philippe Verdy wrote: 2011/9/17 Peter Edberg pedb...@apple.com: 2. Philippe Verdy suggests that the intent of LDM is to change the bidi class of a CS such as '/' to match the bidi class of the preceding EN character. Actually, the intent of LDM

Re: Need for Level Direction Mark

2011-09-18 Thread Peter Edberg
Richard, On Sep 17, 2011, at 7:24 PM, Richard Wordingham wrote: On Fri, 16 Sep 2011 18:59:47 -0700 Peter Edberg pedb...@apple.com wrote: I'll take this argument first. At any rate, it seems that if LDM-like behavior is needed, there is no alternative using existing controls. As Kent

Re: U+25CA LOZENGE - why is it in the Mac OS Roman character set (and therefore widespread in current fonts)?

2012-08-13 Thread Peter Edberg
On Aug 13, 2012, at 9:24 AM, Michael Everson wrote: On 13 Aug 2012, at 14:04, Karl Pentzlin wrote: Am Montag, 13. August 2012 um 14:24 schrieb Michael Everson: ME On 13 Aug 2012, at 12:37, Karl Pentzlin wrote: Why is U+25CA ◊ LOZENGE in the Mac OS Roman character set (at 0xD7 = 215,

Re: What does one do if the encoding is unknown and all you have is a sequence of bytes?

2013-07-19 Thread Peter Edberg
On Jul 19, 2013, at 12:42 PM, Mark Davis ☕ m...@macchiato.com wrote: Popping up a level. ICU (and some other libraries) have heuristic encoding detection, that will take a sequence of bytes and come up with a likely encoding id. However, the ICU encoding detection typically requires more

Re: Why doesn't Ideographic (ID) in UAX#14 have half-width katakana?

2015-05-04 Thread Peter Edberg
I have been checking with various groups at Apple. The consensus here is that we would like to see the linebreak value for halfwidth katakana changed to ID. - Peter E On May 3, 2015, at 12:53 PM, Asmus Freytag (t) asmus-...@ix.netcom.com wrote: On 5/3/2015 9:47 AM, Koji Ishii wrote:

Re: Adding RAINBOW FLAG to Unicode

2015-06-27 Thread Peter Edberg
Philippe and others, You are missing the relevant parts of UTR #51. See: • http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr51/#Multi_Person_Groupings http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr51/#Multi_Person_Groupings • http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr51/#ZWJ_Sequences

CLDR Version 30 alpha available

2016-09-09 Thread Peter Edberg
rgeted for the end of September. Please provide any feedback on the alpha draft version by filing a ticket as described Here: http://cldr.unicode.org/index/bug-reports <http://cldr.unicode.org/index/bug-reports> Best regards, Peter Edberg for the CLDR Project

Re: Standaridized variation sequences for the Desert alphabet?

2017-03-28 Thread Peter Edberg
> On Mar 28, 2017, at 9:30 AM, Asmus Freytag wrote: > > On 3/28/2017 6:56 AM, Michael Everson wrote: >> An æ ligature is a ligature of a and of e. It is not some sort of pretzel. > We need a pretzel emoji. Already in Unicode 10 / emoji 5.0:

Re: Unicode Emoji 5.0 characters now final

2017-03-27 Thread Peter Edberg
(this time from the correct account) Philippe and others, http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr51/tr51-11.html#valid-emoji-tag-sequences refers to CLDR data for the list of valid subregion sequences, see

Re: Should U+3248 ... U+324F be wide characters?

2017-08-18 Thread Peter Edberg via Unicode
Per UTS #51 (see http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr51/#Design_Guidelines ): "Current practice is for emoji to have a square aspect ratio, deriving from their origin in Japanese. For interoperability, it is recommended that this practice be

Re: CLDR 'B'

2017-06-05 Thread Peter Edberg via Unicode
> On Jun 5, 2017, at 1:20 AM, Neil Shadrach via Unicode > wrote: > > > http://cldr.unicode.org/translation/date-time-patterns > > > How are 'B' values added for languages that do not have them? > I cannot see an

Re: Emoji anomaly

2017-10-28 Thread Peter Edberg via Unicode
This is about characters U+1F327,U+1F326 The variation selector FE0F is *not* unnecessary in with these. Looking at https://www.unicode.org/Public/emoji/5.0/emoji-data.txt those characters do *not* have the Emoji-Presentation property

Re: Emoji anomaly

2017-10-29 Thread Peter Edberg via Unicode
nicode <unicode@unicode.org> > wrote: > > Peter > > Thank you very much for your informative response. I see that U+1F321 ➜ > U+1F32C do not have Emoji_Presentation property set. Time for me to do some > reading to determine why. > > André > >> On