> From: Ernest Cline [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Based on http://www.tdil.mit.gov.in/OriyaScriptDetailsApr02.pdf
> I think that only YYA can be used to generate the Oriya ya-phalaa.
That doc tells me they expect < ..., virama, YYA > to display as
ya-phalaa, but it says nothing about how < ..., vi
At 04:18 PM 3/18/2004, Mike Ayers wrote:
> Note that in *that* rendition of the anarchy symbol, the
> crossbar on the A does *not* touch the circle on either
> edge, but it may just be that the renderer was a little
> short of black paint.
I find
http://www.oneposter.com/Product-recordCoun
In response to Philippe V's message:
> Could we get back to encoding real languages and that are still
> missing support for their script in Unicode? Wasn't the new subject
of > Mendé Kikakui not more valuable in Unicode discussions?
> As well as the many other missing African and Asian scripts (A
Based on http://www.tdil.mit.gov.in/OriyaScriptDetailsApr02.pdf
I think that only YYA can be used to generate the Oriya ya-phalaa.
Sorry, I need to revise this a bit, as I
just noticed my question is partially answered: there is a table in section 9.5
that shows U+0B5F YYA being displayed as ya-phalaa. So, my revised question,
then, is whether a sequence like < …, virama, U+0B2F ORIYA LETTER YA
> should *also* be displ
I’m what the encoded representation
of the ya-phalaa in Oriya script is supposed to be. I’m referring to the
typeform
In Unicode, this is considered a presentation
form of ya, but the problem is that there are two ya characters: U+0B2F ORIYA
LETTER YA
and U+0B5F ORIYA LETT
Title: RE: help needed with adding new character
> From: Kenneth Whistler [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2004 3:09 PM
> Why is an Anarchist asking to standardize something?
To cause chaos in the machinery. Perhaps surprisingly, anarchy requires constant pr
Why so many discussions for a symbol that has always been drawn with lots of
free variations on lots of supports and is not even governed by a rule beside
its weak ressemblance to other members of the symbol family? 24B6 is as
acceptable as a variation of a "standard" symbol that does not exist and
At 15:58 -0800 2004-03-18, Peter Kirk wrote:
On 18/03/2004 10:30, Michael Everson wrote:
You mistake orthography and glyph choice with character identity.
"Dotless i" as a *character* is used only in Turkic languages, has
nothing to do with Irish, and never has.
May I pick a nit here? Dotless i
At 16:37 -0600 2004-03-18, Brian wrote:
People do not create machine-readible texts in the old orthography because of
the technical challenges of reproducing them.
I have no difficulty reproducing machine-readable
texts in the old orthography. I typeset a version
of the Irish Constitution last y
At 17:33 -0500 2004-03-18, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
You might say, then why not introduce a "seimhiu" character whose glyphic
representation is either h-following or dot-above? Primarily for Unicode
structural reasons: Unicode needs to say a character is either combining or
not.
I proposed one o
On 18/03/2004 10:30, Michael Everson wrote:
...
You mistake orthography and glyph choice with character identity.
"Dotless i" as a *character* is used only in Turkic languages, has
nothing to do with Irish, and never has.
May I pick a nit here? Dotless i is used in the official orthography of
Ken and I agree.
Though I still think he is dead wrong about the LITTER DUDE.
--
Michael Everson * * Everson Typography * * http://www.evertype.com
Gentlemen,
I think we are missing some important questions here. First:
Why is an Anarchist asking to standardize something?
And, as |\|\ike intimated:
Why is this symbol so neat?
I always thought the anarchy symbol looked more like:
http://www.oneposter.com/Product-recordCount-1-stockid-6050
Quoting Michael Everson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> >he also acknowledges that current spell checkers
> >only work with the modern (Roman) orthography
> >and that there are no spell checkers that work
> >with the "older" orthography.
>
> Because no one needs one, and no one has made a
> corpus o
[EMAIL PROTECTED] scripsit:
> In this context, and if it's true that a spell checker could, in theory, be
> programmed to handle parallel encoding conventions, then why shouldn't Irish
> language "traditionalists" encode the i with a LATIN SMALL LETTER DOTLESS I
> such as <0131>?
It could be don
At 08:27 AM 3/18/2004, Jon Wilson wrote:
Hi folks,
I believe there is a character missing from the standard. I would like to
apply to have it included, but I am a typography and Unicode novice, so I
require some assistance with the application process.
The character in question is a variant of
At 10:34 AM 3/18/2004, Michael Everson wrote:
I think the ANARCHY SIGN is perfectly good, but I think it is a glyph
variant of an existing character.
Just as 2117 and 24C5 are similar, but unrelated the *ANARCHY SIGN is not
the same as 24B6.
A./
At 14:32 -0600 2004-03-18, Brian wrote:
> Well, unless your spelling-checker author is bright enough (as is very
> likely) to handle both dot-convention and h-convention spellings.
> These are not intrinsically tied to Uncial vs. Antiqua font styles,
> though; one can write perfectly good Iris
Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] scripsit:
>
>> Thus, the digraph <0062>+<0068> (i.e., "bh") represents the same
>> conceptual object as <1E03>. Note that, if a selection of Irish text
>> is set using one convention or the other, problems with spell checkers
>> will occur UNLESS the
Title: RE: help needed with adding new character
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> Behalf Of Jon Wilson
> Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2004 11:05 AM
> I disagree that the anarchy symbol is not a character used in the
> representation of words. I can write a word beginni
From: "Michael Everson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> At 19:04 + 2004-03-18, Jon Wilson wrote:
>
> >I also disagree that the Anarchy symbol has no use within a text. I
> >do not doubt that I can find examples of published texts where the
> >anarchy symbol is used throughout.
>
> Please do.
I've seen i
[EMAIL PROTECTED] scripsit:
> Thus, the digraph <0062>+<0068> (i.e., "bh") represents the same conceptual
> object as <1E03>. Note that, if a selection of Irish text is set using one
> convention or the other, problems with spell checkers will occur UNLESS there
> is some metadata that indicates t
At 19:04 + 2004-03-18, Jon Wilson wrote:
I also disagree that the Anarchy symbol has no use within a text. I
do not doubt that I can find examples of published texts where the
anarchy symbol is used throughout.
Please do.
--
Michael Everson * * Everson Typography * * http://www.evertype.com
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
"Ideographic" is a vexed term, and leads to bad reasoning, so let's not use it.
I won't disagree with that.
There is little connection
between the up and down arrows as used by linguists vs. chemists, but we
encode only one set of arrows nevertheless.
Correct.
However, co
I am assuming that you have read, or intend to read the material
on the Unicode site page about proposals [1]. I think the obvious
name to propose for the symbol is ANARCHY. ANARCHY certainly
is a distinct symbol but whether it merits encoding as a text character
will be in question unless its us
At 11:51 -0600 2004-03-18, Unspecified (i.e.
Brian, who should really put his name in his
e-mail program) wrote:
I disagree that the question is this simple. It is not just a font issue.
Yes, it is.
It is a matter of the writing system being used.
The writing system used by Irish is the Latin
Jon Wilson scripsit:
> PEACE SYMBOL, YIN YANG and HAMMER AND SICKLE are represented in Unicode.
> The first and third are even logos for specific organisations (CND and
> various communist governements).
PEACE SYMBOL, as its name indicates, has a considerably wider scope
than nuclear disarmamen
I think the ANARCHY SIGN is perfectly good, but I think it is a glyph
variant of an existing character.
--
Michael Everson * * Everson Typography * * http://www.evertype.com
> See for example, http://www.4commongood.org/images/circlea.jpg
OK.
> 4) Determine a suitable code-page for the character
We don't do "code pages"; and you can actually skip this step if you
aren't sure where it might be able to go.
> 6) Create or find a computerised font representation of t
At 18:00 + 2004-03-18, Jon Wilson wrote:
It's basically a logo, and as such doesn't belong in Unicode, which doesn't
encode logos.
PEACE SYMBOL, YIN YANG and HAMMER AND SICKLE are represented in
Unicode. The first and third are even logos for specific
organisations (CND and various communist
At 09:49 -0800 2004-03-18, Mike Ayers wrote:
Whoops! We forgot step 0, "Verify that it is in fact a
character"[1]. This is where you should have stopped, as the glyph
in question is used in the unique composition of exactly no words.
It's a symbol, not a character.
Lots of symbols are charact
> What "organization" uses the ANARCHY SYMBOL? ;-)
That would be the DIS Organization.
Rick
Title: RE: help needed with adding new character
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> Behalf Of Michael Everson
> Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2004 10:13 AM
> At 09:49 -0800 2004-03-18, Mike Ayers wrote:
>
> >Whoops! We forgot step 0, "Verify that it is in fact a
> >char
Title: RE: help needed with adding new character
> Do I understand you to be saying a character cannot be ideographic
> merely beacuse it is based on a western letter?
How about because it has no ideographic alphabet to be part of?
/|/|ike
Don,
Offers to translate "What is Unicode?" to a particular language should
be addressed to the Unicode office. This can be done through our
reporting form http://www.unicode.org/reporting.html or by emailing me
directly.
Magda
PS: For everybody's convenience, we provide an html template for the
Quoting Marion Gunn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
how to guarantee continuance,
> in the specific context of Irish text computing, of the traditional
> restriction of the Irish diacritic dot (having only one single function in
> Irish) to the consonants to which it belongs?
A spell checker.
--
Jon Hanna
[EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Jon Wilson scripsit:
The character in question is a variant of "CIRCLED LATIN CAPITAL LETTER
A", commonly referred to as the "Anarchy" symbol. The bars of the A are
longer than normal, extending to touch or even overlap the circle.
It's basically a logo, and as such doe
Quoting Doug Ewell <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Marion Gunn wrote:
>
> > To recap: dot above is a traditional diacritic in Irish, reserved for
> > use with certain consonants (its function being served, in Roman
> > script, by placing the 'letter' h after those same consonants). I
> > suppose (with th
Title: RE: help needed with adding new character
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
> Behalf Of Jon Wilson
> Sent: Thursday, March 18, 2004 8:27 AM
> The character in question is a variant of "CIRCLED LATIN
> CAPITAL LETTER
> A", commonly referred to as the "Anarch
Curtis Clark wrote,
> on 2004-03-18 01:05 Pavel Adamek wrote:
> > So it would be convenient to have an empty diacritical mark,
> > (COMBINING NOTHING ABOVE)
> > which would cause the "soft" dot of or to disappear,
> > without adding anything else.
>
> Assuming this could be added to any other
Jon Wilson scripsit:
> The character in question is a variant of "CIRCLED LATIN CAPITAL LETTER
> A", commonly referred to as the "Anarchy" symbol. The bars of the A are
> longer than normal, extending to touch or even overlap the circle.
It's basically a logo, and as such doesn't belong in Uni
Arcane Jill scripsit:
> Why are characters being assigned codepoints > U+, when
> there is still loads and loads of unused empty space below that point.
In fact the BMP is currently 87.5% full. When the 32 remaining blocks
currently shown on the Roadmap are completed, it will be almost 99%
Arcane Jill wrote:
> This probably is going to sound like a really dumb question, but ...
> I'm curious. Why are characters being assigned codepoints > U+,
> when there is still loads and loads of unused empty space below that
> point. Is the BMP being saved for something? Are codepoints < U+
A number of North American Native languages use a character+diacritic when
no character-diacritic exists.
-Romanised Cree has <ē> but no
-Some west-coast Salishan languages have LATIN LAMBDA WITH STROKE+COMBINING
COMMA ABOVE, but no plain LATIN LAMBDA WITH STROKE
-a number of languages (e.g. Mes
> [Original Message]
> From: Arcane Jill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> Maybe someone could assuage my curiosity?
Well to begin with, there are more than 65,536 characters defined now
in Unicode. Take a look at the Roadmap [1] to see where tentative
assignments are being made. It's a bit difficult to
Hi folks,
I believe there is a character missing from the standard. I would like
to apply to have it included, but I am a typography and Unicode novice,
so I require some assistance with the application process.
The character in question is a variant of "CIRCLED LATIN CAPITAL LETTER
A", common
Marion Gunn wrote:
> To recap: dot above is a traditional diacritic in Irish, reserved for
> use with certain consonants (its function being served, in Roman
> script, by placing the 'letter' h after those same consonants). I
> suppose (with thanks to Antoine for reading my msg so carefully) I
>
on 2004-03-18 01:05 Pavel Adamek wrote:
So it would be convenient to have an empty diacritical mark,
(COMBINING NOTHING ABOVE)
which would cause the "soft" dot of or to disappear,
without adding anything else.
Assuming this could be added to any other character, my mind boggles at
the implicatio
On Mar 18, 2004, at 8:33 AM, Arcane Jill wrote:
This probably is going to sound like a really dumb question, but ...
I'm curious. Why are characters being assigned codepoints > U+,
when there is still loads and loads of unused empty space below that
point. Is the BMP being saved for somethi
Anyone who feels that past monetary contributions towards encoding
efforts were made based on false pretenses may be able to seek legal
redress.
There's a certain barrister in Africa who might be able to help in this
regard. Of course, this barrister works under conditions of strict
confidenti
This probably is going to sound like a really dumb question, but ... I'm
curious. Why are characters being assigned codepoints > U+, when
there is still loads and loads of unused empty space below that point.
Is the BMP being saved for something? Are codepoints < U+01
reserved for some
If someone were interested in translating to an additional language(s), to whom
should they write? TIA...
Don Osborn
Bisharat.net
Quoting "Magda Danish \\(Unicode\\)" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> "What is Unicode" in Finnish is now online thanks to Jarkko Hietaniemi.
>
> Check it out at
> http://www
On 17/03/2004 16:20, Rick McGowan wrote:
Marion Gunn wrote...
...
So, my question still is... how to guarantee continuance,
in the specific context of Irish text computing, of the traditional
restriction of the Irish diacritic dot (having only one single function in
Irish) to the consonants to
> lowercase j is "soft-dotted" meaning that
> its default dot disappears
> when there's a diacritic above it,
> and this includes the combining dot above.
So it would be convenient to have an empty diacritical mark,
(COMBINING NOTHING ABOVE)
which would cause the "soft" dot of or to disappear,
w
55 matches
Mail list logo
