On Mon, 8 Oct 2001 18:32:05 -0700 (PDT), Kenneth Whistler wrote:
This would definitely not work. The problem is that while the CJK
left/right corner brackets are clearly bracketing punctuation, you
have to contend with their other properties as CJK punctuation. Most
systems will default them to
On Sat, 22 Sep 2001 18:46:36 EDT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
I would be fascinated to see some sort of evidence that addition and
subtraction is easier in Roman numerals than in Hindu-Arabic (European)
numerals.
I + I = II
X + X = XX
X + X + X = XXX
C + X = CX
CX - X = C
For these
On Thu, 21 Jun 2001 09:40:22 -0400, Elliotte Rusty Harold wrote:
At 9:35 PM +0100 6/20/01, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
| In addition, XML 1.0 attempts to adapt to the line-end conventions of
| various modern operating systems, but discriminates against the
| convention used on IBM and
On Sun, 6 May 2001 19:22:38 -0400 (EDT), Thomas Chan wrote:
#On Sun, 6 May 2001, David J. Perry wrote:
#
# Word 2000 (under Win98) insists on using Arial Unicode MS whenever you
# insert a character in the CJK Punctuation range. There are some characters
# here that might be useful in non-CJK
On Mon, 7 May 2001 11:35:40 EDT, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
#In a message dated 2001-05-07 6:55:01 Pacific Daylight Time,
#[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
#
# Current programming languages (C++ and others) have violated
# what I consider good language design by overloading the same
# glyphs for
5 matches
Mail list logo
