On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 12:57:39AM -0500, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
> This is why I really wish that SCSU were considered a truly "standard"
> encoding scheme. Even among the Unicode cognoscenti it is usually
> accompanied by disclaimers about "private agreement only" and "not suitable
> for us
On Mon, Jan 21, 2002 at 12:39:58AM -0500, Aman Chawla wrote:
> > What's your point in continuing this? Most of the people on this list
> > already know how UTF-8 can expand the size of non-English text.
>
> The issue was originally brought up to gather opinion from members of this
> list as to wh
In a message dated 2002-01-20 21:49:02 Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> The issue was originally brought up to gather opinion from members of this
> list as to whether UTF-8 or ISCII should be used for creating Devanagari web
> pages. The point is not to criticise Unicode but t
In a message dated 2002-01-20 20:49:00 Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> Usually, when someone offers
> a large body of plain text in any script, files are compressed
> in one way or another in order to speed up downloads.
This is why I really wish that SCSU were considered a
On Sun, 20 Jan 2002, Aman Chawla wrote:
> Taking the extra links into account the sizes are:
> English: 10.4 Kb
> Devanagari: 15.0 Kb
> Thus the Dev. page is 1.44 times the Eng. page. For sites providing archives
> of documents/manuscripts (in plain text) in Devanagari, this factor could be
> as
- Original
Message -From: "David Starner" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>To: "Aman Chawla" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Cc: "James Kass" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Unicode"<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>Sent: Monday, January 21, 2002 12:19
AMSubject: Re: Devanagari> What's your point in continuing
this? Most of the people
On Sun, Jan 20, 2002 at 10:44:00PM -0500, Aman Chawla wrote:
> For sites providing archives
> of documents/manuscripts (in plain text) in Devanagari, this factor could be
> as high as approx. 3 using UTF-8 and around 1 using ISCII.
Uncompressed, yes. It shouldn't be nearly as bad compressed - gzi
- Original Message -
From: "James Kass" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Aman Chawla" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Unicode"
<[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Monday, January 21, 2002 12:46 AM
Subject: Re: Devanagari
> 25% may not be 300%, but it isn't insignificant. As you note, if the
> mark-up were removed
Aman Chawla wrote,
> Taking the extra links into account the sizes are:
> English: 10.4 Kb
> Devanagari: 15.0 Kb
> Thus the Dev. page is 1.44 times the Eng. page. For sites providing archives
> of documents/manuscripts (in plain text) in Devanagari, this factor could be
> as high as approx. 3 us
Taking the extra links into account the sizes are:
English: 10.4 Kb
Devanagari: 15.0 Kb
Thus the Dev. page is 1.44 times the Eng. page. For sites providing archives
of documents/manuscripts (in plain text) in Devanagari, this factor could be
as high as approx. 3 using UTF-8 and around 1 using ISCI
At 10:44 PM 1/20/2002 -0500, you wrote:
>Taking the extra links into account the sizes are:
>English: 10.4 Kb
>Devanagari: 15.0 Kb
>Thus the Dev. page is 1.44 times the Eng. page. For sites providing archives
>of documents/manuscripts (in plain text) in Devanagari, this factor could be
>as high as
Doug Ewell wrote,
>
> I think before worrying about the performance and storage effect on Web pages
> due to UTF-8, it might help to do some profiling and see what the actual
> impact is.
>
The "What is Unicode?" pages offer a quick study.
14808 bytes (English)
15218 bytes (Hindi)
10808 by
Does someone know if Framemaker+SGML 6.0 supports Unicode?
If not, do standard content management tools such as FrameLink do the
conversion to Unicode before storing their data in their repository
(Documentum for instance)?
If you know of such solutions, I would love to hear from you.
Patrick
On Sun, Jan 20, 2002 at 07:39:57PM -0500, Aman Chawla wrote:
> The point was that a UTF-8 encoded HTML file for an English web page
> carrying say 10 gifs would have a file size one-third that for a Devanagari
> web page with the same no. of gifs
The point is, that the text for a short webpage i
On Sun, Jan 20, 2002 at 07:39:57PM -0500, Aman Chawla wrote:
: The point was that a UTF-8 encoded HTML file for an English web page
: carrying say 10 gifs would have a file size one-third that for a Devanagari
: web page with the same no. of gifs - even if you take into account the
: fluctuation o
In a message dated 2002-01-20 16:49:17 Pacific Standard Time,
[EMAIL PROTECTED] writes:
> The point was that a UTF-8 encoded HTML file for an English web page
> carrying say 10 gifs would have a file size one-third that for a Devanagari
> web page with the same no. of gifs...
> Therefore transmi
> The fact that UTF-8 economizes on the storage for ASCII characters, is a
> benefit for *all* HTML users, as the HTML syntax is entirely in ASCII and
> claims a significant fraction of the data.
> A UTF-8 encoded HTML file, will therefore have (percentage-wise) less
overhead
> for Devanagari as
At 12:48 AM 1/20/02 -0800, James Kass wrote:
>The arguments about relative size are true, but in this day and age are
>considered unimportant. Graphics files are extremely large in comparison
>with text files of any script and so are sound files. Devanagari UTF-8 is
>three bytes. The four byte
Hello.
My current application works with 'Windows HyperTerminal' using an RS-232
cable from the client machine to the server machine (that means that the
terminal is running on the client).
Until today, the terminal sent 8bit (char) characters from the client to the
server.
Now I have a need to s
At 11:22 -0500 2002-01-20, Aman Chawla wrote:
>I am unable to find the Devanagari Rupee sign encoded in Unicode? Is
>it encoded? If not, why?
>
U+20A8.
--
Michael Everson *** Everson Typography *** http://www.evertype.com
Hi James,
I appreciate the research, and the humor! 2 pis = peace, eh?
(not on the unicode list! :-) but I like that especially since
the issue of a name has been problematic. e to the i peace =1
circumference = peace times r, integral from zero to peace,
period = peace over frequency, has a
I am unable to find the Devanagari Rupee sign
encoded in Unicode? Is it encoded? If not, why?
Aman Chawla wrote,
> I would be grateful if I could get opinions on the following:
> 1. Which encoding/character set is most suitable for using Hindi/Marathi
> (both of which use Devanagari) on the internet as well as in databases, and
> why? In your response, please refer to:
> http://www.ii
23 matches
Mail list logo
