If you are
interested in Windows programming in assembler, there are now various
enhancements to GoAsm (free assembler) and GoLink (free linker). In
particular, GoAsm will now assemble Unicode files (both UTF-8 and
UTF-16).This means you can now use a Unicode command line; use input,
Quoting [EMAIL PROTECTED] [EMAIL PROTECTED]:
Michael Everson scripsit:
TTB, not T2B, please. [...] BTT, not B2T, please.
It would be a violation of my traditional cultural standards to use T
instead of 2 for to. Furthermore, using 2 prevents me from writing
TBB and other such
On Friday, May 14, 2004 10:22 PM, Peter Constable wrote:
It is simply inadequate analysis of usage scenarios to say an
order form contains formatted dates / numbers / currency that need to
be interpreted, therefore this document has a locale.
Sorry, you lost me. I do not know what usage
On Mon, 17 May 2004 22:59:50 -0400, John Cowan wrote:
It should not. That's what makes Ogham different from standard
horizontal scripts -- it does have a preferred vertical orientation,
It does ? I thought that the whole point of much of the recent discussion was
the uncertainty of how Ogham
Philippe Verdy wrote on Tuesday, May 18th, 2004 12:24:
Also there are differences in orthographs in the table lists:
the plain text version and Table 2 use consonnants with dot
below for the english name, but Table 1 use basic Latin
consonnants (example for Malalayam).
I believe these are
Antoine Leca scripsit:
OTOH, it appears to me (feel free to contradict me, and also to to
point me the epoch when these things did change) that English habits
now is to follow the native name and the translitteration rules.
True, although diacritics are still sometimes dropped not on
At 04:49 -0700 2004-05-18, Andrew C. West wrote:
But what is this preferred vertical orientation of Ogham that you
speak of ? Is it specified in the Unicode Standard ? And if not,
should it be ?
Come on, people. Read the standard, please. It's on page 338.
--
Michael Everson * * Everson
Antoine Leca wrote:
A good example I found
recently is the name of Cervantes' main work, which short name is Don
Quixote in English, the same as it was in (original) Castilian, while at
the same time it was adapted in French as Don Quichotte (same
prononciation as original), and similarly in
John Cowan wrote:
Most people say [kihote], since we do not have the Spanish j, IPA [x].
(Of course the [o] and [e] vowels become diphthongs, as in most varieties
of English.) I personally made a mild nuisance of myself in the class
where I studied it by insisting on saying [kiSote]. The derived
Staying out of this thread probably won't help it go away, so...
John Cowan cowan at ccil dot org wrote:
The derived adjective quixotic, however, is pronounced in native
fashion [kwIksOtIk].
This seems fair. Even if there is a Spanish adjective quixtico -- I
found only one Google hit for it
On Tuesday, May 18, 2004 5:34 PM, Doug Ewell va escriure:
Staying out of this thread probably won't help it go away, so...
;-)
The change of suject is adequate, anyways.
This seems fair. Even if there is a Spanish adjective quixótico --
I found only one Google hit for it in Spanish, but
Unsubscribe
Elaine Keown
Tucson
Bonjour,
OK Cprt;403;Cypriot is there
Aren't there about 5 kinds of Cypriot or Cypro-
this, that, and the other?
I've become more knowledgeable since the Everson
Phoenician appearedElaine
At 10:50 -0700 2004-05-18, E. Keown wrote:
Bonjour,
OK Cprt;403;Cypriot is there
Aren't there about 5 kinds of Cypriot or Cypro- this, that, and the other?
This refers to the Cypriot syllabary encoded at U+10800-U+1083F.
I've become more knowledgeable since the Everson Phoenician appeared.
A
While we are here, will Coptic disunification imply restoration of Coptic to
the ISO-15924 list (it was there at one time, number 205 in a 1998 draft) or
will you stick with private use Qaac per UTR #24?
Thanks
Bob Richmond
Saqqara Technology
- Original Message -
From: Michael Everson
Elaine Keown
Tucson
Hi,
I waited to respond to the remarks below until I
locked my flamethrower and grenades in the downstairs
closet.for several days.
Mark Davis wrote:
1. Michael has made some very good contributions to
the work of script encoding,
I've come to
While we are here, will Coptic disunification imply restoration of Coptic to
the ISO-15924 list (it was there at one time, number 205 in a 1998 draft) or
will you stick with private use Qaac per UTR #24?
Thanks
Bob Richmond
Saqqara Technology
- Original Message -
From: Michael Everson
Title: RE: [BULK] - Re: ISO-15924 script nodes and UAX#24 script IDs
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]On
Behalf Of Mark E. Shoulson
Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2004 7:21 AM
Donkey Hotay
Hmmm - isn't that a quote from Shrek?
/|/|ike
Andrew C. West scripsit:
It does ? I thought that the whole point of much of the recent discussion was
the uncertainty of how Ogham should be laid out in vertically formatted text,
such as when embedded in Mongolian or vertical Chinese.
What's uncertain is whether a lr or a rl progression is
From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Andrew C. West scripsit:
It does ? I thought that the whole point of much of the recent discussion
was
the uncertainty of how Ogham should be laid out in vertically formatted
text,
such as when embedded in Mongolian or vertical Chinese.
What's uncertain is whether
Philippe Verdy wrote:
What's uncertain is whether a lr or a rl progression is favored, given the
paucity of evidence. Michael favors lr progression. There is no question
that the text is read BTT.
This creates an interesting problem: Put in the same sentence Han (Chinese) and
Mongolian words in
Philippe Verdy scripsit:
This creates an interesting problem: Put in the same sentence Han
(Chinese) and Mongolian words in a vertical layout (I don't think this
is unlikely, as Mongolian is also spoken in China, and there's also
a Chinese community in Mongolia). So Chinese ideographs will be
Bob Richmond, wearing a shirt that says saqqara saqqara at csi dot
com wrote:
While we are here, will Coptic disunification imply restoration of
Coptic to the ISO-15924 list (it was there at one time, number 205 in
a 1998 draft) or will you stick with private use Qaac per UTR #24?
I hadn't
All right, as long as I mentioned it...
For those who like ISO 15924 script codes and LOVE the Unicode Private
Use Area -- you know who you are -- check out my list of proposed ISO
15924 private-use codes for the ConScript Unicode Registry:
http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/conscript-15924.html
John Cowan wrote:
When Mongolian stands alone, the columns progress from left to right,
but when it's mixed with Han, the columns progress from right to left,
as is the case with Chinese alone.
Actually, it depends on which language is the primary language. If the
primary language is Mongolian,
25 matches
Mail list logo
