$B$m!;!;!;!;(B $B$m!;!;!;(B scripsit:
> Do there exist official Russian names of Unicode characters? They could
> probably be constructed with slightly less difficulty than English names.
>
> If these Russian names do not exist, maybe you can make some up! I know
> there are French names!
I h
> A ideal interface should probably automatically and silently select
> Unicode
> (and its default UTF) whenever one or more of the characters in a document
> are not representable in the local encoding.
I beg to differ. Silently doing such an unexpected change is guaranteed to
confuse the user,
Can anyone here respond to this query? Thanks.
Peter
- Forwarded by Peter Constable/IntlAdmin/WCT on 02/12/2002 02:51 PM
-
Are there a couple key web sites you'd
recommend to someone who's tasked with
knowing about and implementing "collation"
for Hebrew/Arabic in particular? I'm sur
On Tue, Feb 12, 2002 at 08:12:08PM +0100, Marco Cimarosti wrote:
> OK, UTF-8 is my favorite default UTF too. However, whatever the default is,
> it is easier to just call it "Unicode", and call the other options "Unicode
> (something else)".
>
> That puts one less acronym in front of the "naive"
David Starner wrote:
> On Tue, Feb 12, 2002 at 11:22:01AM +0100, Marco Cimarosti wrote:
> > At best, the localization could use a label such as
> "Unicode (UTF-8)" to
> > enforce the concept that UTF-8 is Unicode as well. But it
> could hardly use
> > "Unicode (UTF-16BE)" for the *default* UTF,
On Tue, Feb 12, 2002 at 11:22:01AM +0100, Marco Cimarosti wrote:
> At best, the localization could use a label such as "Unicode (UTF-8)" to
> enforce the concept that UTF-8 is Unicode as well. But it could hardly use
> "Unicode (UTF-16BE)" for the *default* UTF, because the user would ask
> "Where
On Tue, 12 Feb 2002, Michael Everson wrote:
> At 18:37 + 2002-02-11, Juliusz Chroboczek wrote:
> > - a cross-reference of characters whose associated glyphs are
> > identical, whatever the font (applies to symbols and ``modifier
> > letters'');
>
> But the letter b isn't identical
> I see them correctly. The problem is the font; the standard
> Arial/Times don't contain all the Greek characters; notably
> the polytonic. Since I use Arial Unicode MS as my default
> browser font, they appear to me. Any other font that had a
> full repertoire of Greek would serve as well. (It w
I see them correctly. The problem is the font; the standard
Arial/Times don't contain all the Greek characters; notably the polytonic. Since
I use Arial Unicode MS as my default browser font, they appear to me. Any other
font that had a full repertoire of Greek would serve as well. (It would
>As a poor software maker, I suppose I ought to defend other software
>makers. >EVERYONE KNOWS that Unicode and UTF-16 are the same thing. It is,
>>unfortunately, irrelevant that in this case (as in so many others) "what
>>everyone knows" happens to be untrue. We exist to conform to the user's
>>e
Martin Kochanski wrote:
> >From: Tom Gewecke <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
[...]
> > I constantly run into browser, mail, and text editing software
> > with encoding menus that list, as two separate items, Unicode
> > and UTF-8, as if Unicode and UTF-16 were identical and as if
> > UTF-8 were not Unicode.
This is several weeks old now, but may still be news of interest to some
on this list.
- Peter
---
Peter Constable
Non-Roman Script Initiative, SIL International
7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd., Dallas, TX 75236, USA
Tel: +1 972
* Juliusz Chroboczek
|
| - a map from characters to scripts;
http://www.unicode.org/Public/3.1-Update/Scripts-3.1.0.txt >
--
Lars Marius Garshol, Ontopian http://www.ontopia.net >
ISO SC34/WG3, OASIS GeoLang TChttp://www.garshol.priv.no >
As a poor software maker, I suppose I ought to defend other software makers. EVERYONE
KNOWS that Unicode and UTF-16 are the same thing. It is, unfortunately, irrelevant
that in this case (as in so many others) "what everyone knows" happens to be untrue.
We exist to conform to the user's expecta
>But in this case I would ask people responsible for that not to disable
this
>feature in future Russian editions of Office. It would help not only to
>detect "spoof buddies" but also allows easier input of IPA diacritics.
>Because even with 1024x768 resolution on 15" monitor it is difficult to
15 matches
Mail list logo
