Kaixo!
On Wed, Nov 13, 2002 at 11:42:40PM -0800, Emil Soleyman-Zomalan wrote:
Hi,
I've been working recently on adding Syriac keyboard support to xkb.
Nice.
I've created a standard Syriac keyboard map (a phonetic one is in the
works) along with the needed keysyms to be placed in
On Fri, 15 Nov 2002, Emil Soleyman-Zomalan wrote:
Would be it safe to assume that those charactes should be assigned a
unicode codepoint instead of directly going to keysymdef.h? If
Arabic_comma is already defined as a keysym, should I ignore it and go
with its equivalent in Unicode?
I'd
On Fri, 15 Nov 2002, Roozbeh Pournader wrote:
: I'd suggest using keysyms if one already exists. There are still
: applications that don't support the Unicode keysyms, and you may want to
: maximize the characters that get in.
:
: BTW, you'll name it 'syr', won't you?
Yes I will.
--
Emil
ES -- for example, Arabic-Indic numbering, plus, minus, Arabic shadda to
ES name a few.
ES Would be it safe to assume that those charactes should be assigned a
ES unicode codepoint instead of directly going to keysymdef.h?
No.
If a key has an ad hoc keysym definition, it *must* use it for
On Thu, 2002-11-14 at 07:43, Emil Soleyman-Zomalan wrote:
I've been working recently on adding Syriac keyboard support to xkb.
I've created a standard Syriac keyboard map (a phonetic one is in the
works) along with the needed keysyms to be placed in keysymdef.h
Hi. Adding new keysms is the
On Thu, 14 Nov 2002, Abigail Brady wrote:
: Hi. Adding new keysms is the Wrong Thing To Do if these keysyms
: correspond 1:1 with Unicode characters. Just directly reference
: the Unicode characters. For example, keysm 0x1000710 is equivilant
: to Syriac Alaph. In any event, your keysyms are
Emil Soleyman-Zomalan wrote on 2002-11-14 16:00 UTC:
Just for my own knowledge, what would be the disadvantage of creating a
new set of keysyms for Syriac as already has been done for several other
languages?
There is nothing wrong in principle with adding new keysyms, however the
integer
