Don't you ever call me 'baby' again! she yelled.
^ ^^
| ||
These are three separate abstract characters, but I
use one glyph for all of them. What are the three codepoints
I use for them in Unicode? (Unicode encodes abstract
characters, I hear.)
Here is an example I wrote.
*** JUUICHIKETAJIN ***
___
Get your own FREE Bolt Onebox - FREE voicemail, email, and
fax, all in one place - sign up at http://www.bolt.com
Title: Han clock test
Han clock (mostly)
Mike,
Long after upgrading to Win2K, setting up all my fonts, and testing
everything, I've come to a conclusion: there are darn few Unicode text
messages on the Unicode mail list (i.e. characters are referred to by
codepoint, but the character itself is never included).
While I
In a message dated 2001-05-01 5:23:12 Pacific Daylight Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
Don't you ever call me 'baby' again! she yelled.
^ ^^
| ||
These are three separate abstract characters, but I
use one glyph for all of them. What
Mike,
We need to get more e-mail software upgraded for UTF-8 support. It is great between
users who have UTF-8 support but a lot of code out there does not support it yet.
The problem with UTF-8 support is that many have tried to add it to their existing
codepage based products. Thus for
-Original Message-
From: Negi, Yogesh (GEP,Contractor) [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Sunday, April 29, 2001 5:13 PM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: Hexadecimal number for Unicode Data
Hello,
I have Oracle 8.0.6 as backend. I store Japanese Korean and English in
UTF-8 format.
Folks,
So good to see so many people at last week's Hong Kong conference. After
all of the
stimulating discussions, I am sure many of you have some good topics to
propose for
the September San Jose conference. Please send in your submissions...!
Thank you,
Lisa
L A S T C
At 11:21 AM -0700 5/1/01, Magda Danish (Unicode) wrote:
-Original Message-
From: Michal Gerling [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2001 7:24 AM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: chinese conversion tables
I am working with UNICODE and the CJK market and need to know: Is
Asmus Freytag wrote:
This would violate the neutrality that the Unicode
Consortium is bound to observe when it comes to
uses of the Private Use Area. By encoding characters
it would implicitly endorse the scheme (or series of
schemes) designed to use these characters.
end quote
I have read the
-Original Message-
From: Michal Gerling [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Sent: Tuesday, May 01, 2001 7:24 AM
To: '[EMAIL PROTECTED]'
Subject: chinese conversion tables
I am working with UNICODE and the CJK market and need to know: Is there
any one table or formula for moving from
From: William Overington [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
Can there be found a possible usage that such a scheme would
not support?
Finding just one would resolve the question.
I suspect that the whole issue is covered by Goedel's(sp?)
Incompleteness theorem, which says (approximately)
Hi Michal,
Our company produces a product that addresses your problem, including all
the issues mentioned by John Jenkins below. We call it our
Chinese-to-Chinese Script Converter, or C2C for short.
In particular it does not only code-point conversion but also orthographic
and lexemic
On Tue, May 01, 2001 at 12:53:57PM -0600, John H. Jenkins wrote:
I am working with UNICODE and the CJK market and need to know: Is there
any one table or formula for moving from simplified to traditional
characters and back in UNICODE? thank you very much for your help!
Michelle g.
Partial
William Overington perorated:
Asmus continues:
Going further and outlining a protocol for such a
thing is even worse - if done by the Unicode Consortium.
However, it would be fine for any other organization
to define the protocol - but that organization could
not assign any special
From: John H. Jenkins [EMAIL PROTECTED]
It really isn't possible to
convert between simplified and traditional characters without doing a
lexical analysis.
Word 2000/2002 both have a conversion utility that does the lexical analysis
that John refers to here. Others will have to speak to how
Long after upgrading to Win2K, setting up all my fonts, and testing
everything, I've come to a conclusion: there are darn few Unicode text
messages on the Unicode mail list (i.e. characters are referred to by
codepoint, but the character itself is never included).
Is it considered wrong to
At 07:53 PM 5/1/01 +0100, William Overington wrote:
Asmus continues:
Since such scheme(s) support only some particular
usage (or set of usages) of the private use area,
the consortium would no longer be neutral towards
*any and all* uses of the Private Use Area.
end quote
This is the core
David Starner wrote:
quote
I'm okay with UTF-8 messages, but stuff like this annoys me. I usually
read my messages in Mutt on the Linux console, which means I'm limited
to a 512 character, single-width font. Normal UTF-8 messages, I can
get the English part of the message fine, and if I care
18 matches
Mail list logo
