Um,
What I think is that *I* for one am certainly not going to invest any
effort in pseudo-coding scripts in a PreScript Unicode Registry.
The work to get scripts proposed and encoded is enough. If someone is
interested in a script, and wants to build fonts for it based on
script proposals,
At 18:45 -0600 2002-03-12, David Starner wrote:
Would it even be *legal* to
include those characters (referring to U+00A9 COPYRIGHT SIGN)?
One journal written in [Quenya] in Tengwar asked a lawyer that question,
and was told that it was completely legal for them to use the language
and
At 19:01 -0500 2002-03-12, John Cowan wrote:
Stefan Persson scripsit:
Is there any chance that Tengwar and Cirth might become parts of the UCS? I
know that they have been proposed for inclusion, but all proposed characters
don't have to be included in the standard...
Of the insiders, some
From: William Overington [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The use of this hexadecimal point technique would allow characters from
several different character sets to be used in the same plain text file.
You do enjoy making things complicated\, William. :-)
This whole system is prety much not needed, since
Michael Everson scripsit:
Who's strongly against it?'re perfectly valid scripts. They
I don't recall any names, but I definitely remember that some people
feel it's trivializing Unicode, and a waste of resources that could
be spent on Real World, if rarely used, scripts.
--
John Cowan
At 08:58 -0500 2002-03-13, John Cowan wrote:
Michael Everson scripsit:
Who's strongly against it?'re perfectly valid scripts. They
I don't recall any names, but I definitely remember that some people
feel it's trivializing Unicode, and a waste of resources that could
be spent on Real World,
On Wed, Mar 13, 2002 at 07:06:12AM -0800, Michael (michka) Kaplan wrote:
I
think it is entirely reasonable to look at rarely used scripts and fictional
scripts (both of which member companies are unlikely to implement for
reasons I doubt I need to go into here?) and categorize them a lower
On Wed, 13 Mar 2002, William Overington wrote:
Here is a system that I think would work.
Consider please that there exists for the private use area the concept of
the hexadecimal point. The term hexadecimal point is similar to the
concept of a decimal point, the difference being that a
At 07:06 -0800 2002-03-13, Michael \(michka\) Kaplan wrote:
But, devil's advocate -- since Unicode is an industrial consortium which
must ultimately answer to its members (and whose representatives must
ultimately answer to their superiors in terms of budgeting that $12,000!), I
think it is
From: David Starner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sure. That's been done, and now almost everything not rarely-used or
fictional has been encoded.
Still stuff on the roadmap. :-)
After that, perhaps Unicode can takle a step back and start working on
supporting its members and helping them implement what
Unicode should be concerned about how people perceive it. And how those
higher ups who approve the budget money to belong to Unicode perceive
things like Tengwar (do any of the member companies plan to add locale
information for Elvish regions, collation, fonts, or anything else?).
Not that I
On Tue, 12 Mar 2002, John Cowan wrote:
[snip]
(In truth neither of us has had much time to process new registrations
lately. Arse longa, vita brevis.)
[snip]
--
John Cowan [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.reutershealth.com
I amar prestar aen, han mathon ne nen,
At 09:57 -0700 2002-03-13, Tom Gewecke wrote:
Not that I have seen so far. Although Tengwar and Cirth, unlike many
fictional scripts, *are* connected to a significant money machine, namely 3
feature films over three years, the first of which grossed $350 million in
its first 3 weeks.
Or unlike
At 08:44 -0800 2002-03-13, Michael \(michka\) Kaplan wrote:
From: David Starner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sure. That's been done, and now almost everything not rarely-used or
fictional has been encoded.
Still stuff on the roadmap. :-)
Yep. If you count the number of scripts roadmapped to be
From: Michael Everson [EMAIL PROTECTED]
The JTC1 Member Bodies, however, do not represent an industrial
consortium. The goal of the Universal Character Set is to represent
all the world's writing systems.
Yes, and perhaps the proposals can start there, then.
If accepted into the standard,
James E. Agenbroad scripsit:
Arse longa, vita brevis.
I have a little Greek but no Latin, but should that be Ars longa ...?
Of course, but I was punning.
--
John Cowan [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.reutershealth.com
I amar prestar aen, han mathon ne nen,http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
On Wed, Mar 13, 2002 at 08:44:13AM -0800, Michael (michka) Kaplan wrote:
From: David Starner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Sure. That's been done, and now almost everything not rarely-used or
fictional has been encoded.
Still stuff on the roadmap. :-)
What's left on the roadmap that isn't rarely
From: David Starner [EMAIL PROTECTED]
In my eyes, part of the success of Unicode is that it has every
character one could need, and if it doesn't, then it will next version.
If you want to make Unicode into a purely commercial standard, then you
may lose some of the major Unicode enthusiasts
On Sun, Mar 10, 2002 at 09:47:50PM -0800, Doug Ewell wrote:
You do realize, of course, that any sort of work done with Old Persian
Cuneiform based on N1639 should be limited to laboratory
experimentation. Not only is this script not in Unicode, it's been
relegated to the under investigation
Michka,
The fact
that there is no member companhy that fully implements all of Unicode has go
to be staicking in more craws that just mine.
Ulp. Craw-staicking must be painful. ;-)
But I think people may need to come to the realization that Unicode
may have exceeded the point where we can
Michka,
I am mentioning that each person there works for a company which has its
greatest interest in seeinf developed what they plan to sell. The fact that
the UTC itself is filled with linguists and other such specialists is a very
good thing for other scripts, but I suspect that many of
On Wed, 13 Mar 2002, Michael Everson wrote:
Um,
What I think is that *I* for one am certainly not going to invest any
effort in pseudo-coding scripts in a PreScript Unicode Registry.
The work to get scripts proposed and encoded is enough. If someone is
interested in a script, and wants
Just to complete my thanks (now that I've received the digest), thanks
too to Michael Everson for his comments, and John Hudson for the
typographer's viewpoint on this suggestion.
On the other subject that has been zipping about under this heading:
I asked about ConScript only because it was
From: Martin Kochanski [EMAIL PROTECTED]
To: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Subject: Polish ASCII
Date: Fri, 01 Mar 2002 23:53:07 +
This question is, by definition, off-topic; but I'm asking it because the
members of this list are just the sort of people who might know the
answer... and because this
The other aspect of the real world is that there are old dogs and there
are new tricks, and you can't always get the former to do the latter no
matter how much you wish they could.
If you're trying to offer users something not supported on old systems,
you are going to have to get users to
Would anyone happen to know a Unicode CD database software?
Ideally, I would like to access this database on Macs as well as PC.
Completely ideal: an XML database.
Thanks a lot in advance,
P. Andries
At 05:58 3/13/2002, Patrick T. Rourke wrote:
True, but many scholarly communities are small enough that their needs
might not be of interest to type designers with a wider targeted audience
(like Mr. Hudson), and so depend largely upon small typographers, even
amateurs to provide their type.
27 matches
Mail list logo
