> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Peter Constable
> Sent: Tuesday, November 30, 2004 1:20 AM
> To: Unicode Mailing List
> Subject: RE: No Invisible Character - NBSP at the start of a word
>
>
> > From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMA
Peter Kirk wrote:
> But what happens when a proposal put forward by the UTC is rejected by
> voting members of WG2, which are ISO member bodies worldwide?...
>
> So what does WG2 do? Does it follow its fixed policy of agreeing with
> the UTC despite negative votes? Does "self-abnegation" trump
>
Robert Finch wrote:
> I see that there are no Unicode characters assigned for cursor/edit
> keys other than that which were originally in ascii ('return', 'tab',
> 'backspace', 'delete'). Could keys like 'cursor left', 'cursor up',
> 'Home', etc. be incorporated somewhere within the standard ?
Th
On Monday 2004.11.29 16:30:06 -0800, Allen Haaheim wrote:
> >they often (not always) combine 1 or more radicals, with 1 or more strokes
> >that are not radicals themselves.
>
> Sorry Philippe, this is simply not true, and your email follows this with a
> few dubious statements. A Han character has
Hi,
This issue has probably been brought up before, but
I was wondering how it was resolved. I see that there are no Unicode characters
assigned for cursor/edit keys other than that which were originally in ascii
('return', 'tab', 'backspace', 'delete'). Could keys like 'cursor left',
'cur
Allen Haaheim provided some further detailed clarification:
> Note that Han characters are logographic, not ideographic. That is,
> they are graphemes that represent words (or at least morphemes),
> not ideas.
This correctly states the situation for the normal case for
Chinese characters used w
Kevin Brown, James Kass, and others: Please take this off-topic issue
up privately, not on the mail list. People wishing to engage in the
discussion have been alerted, and may do so elsewhere.
Regards,
-- Sarasvati
Kevin Brown wrote,
> Dear Dean
>
> I personally have not followed the Phoenician thread. While I can understand
> the
> frustration of having a discussion blocked (however valid or invalid the
> reason)
> I think the method you are choosing to continue it is unprofessional.
We disagree.
>they often (not always) combine 1 or more radicals, with 1 or more strokes
>that are not radicals themselves.
Sorry Philippe, this is simply not true, and your email follows this with a
few dubious statements. A Han character has one radical. That is, it can be
catalogued under only one radical,
John Hudson responded to Jony Rosenne:
> The idea that the position of such text on a page -- as a marginal
> note -- somehow demotes
> it from being text, is particularly nonsensical.
I think you two (Jony and John) are talking at cross-purposes
on this particular point.
The *content* of marg
Note that Han characters are logographic, not ideographic. That is, they are
graphemes that represent words (or at least morphemes), not ideas. In the west,
Peter du Ponceau first argued this in the nineteenth century, and the likes of
Bernhard Karlgren, Peter A. Boodberg, Y.R. Chao and Edward H
On 29/11/2004 19:06, Jony Rosenne wrote:
...
Qere and Ketiv are not malformed. I don't think anyone disagrees that they
are the juxtaposition of the letters of one word with the vowel points of
another.
That most cases can be visibly reproduced by Unicode is a hack, and is not a
sufficient justific
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf
> Of Peter Kirk
> But what happens when a proposal put forward by the UTC is rejected by
> voting members of WG2...
We cannot categorize what has happened as voting members of WG2
rejecting a UTC proposal. First, what has happened is
At 02:14 PM 11/29/2004, Kenneth Whistler wrote:
By the way, Google is your friend. If you want to get
information about such things, googling for it is a
good way to start. I suggest reading:
http://encyclopedia.thefreedictionary.com/Chinese%20writing%20system
As Richard Cook has pointed out, the d
On Monday, 29 November 2004 at 8:52 AM, Dean Snyder wrote:
>You are getting this email directly because Rick McGowan, the moderator
>of the Unicode email list, sent me the following response concerning my
>attempt to post the appended message to the Unicode email list:
>
>>All threads on Phoenicia
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On Behalf
> Of Jony Rosenne
> > But it *is* a
> > piece of text, however
> > malformed it might seem from normal lexicographic
> > understanding. It may not be a word. It
> > may, in fact, be two words merged into a unit. But it is most
> > certa
On 27/11/2004 06:29, John Cowan wrote:
...
But formally these other bodies do have the right to
outvote Unicode, and in effect to force Unicode to reverse its decisions
- or else to reverse its policy of maintaining compatibility.
Formally, yes. However, by acts of self-abnegation, WG2 has
Michael Norton (a.k.a. Flarn) asked:
> What's an ideograph? Also, what's a radical?
> Are they the same thing?
No, they aren't.
In the Unicode context, the simplest answer is that
an "ideograph" or a "CJK ideograph" is simply to be
taken as a synonym for "a Chinese character".
A "radical" is on
The term ideograph has special meaning in Unicode/ISO usage. "Ideograph"
is short for "CJK Unified Ideograph", and is one of the characters with
mapping or reference data in the Unihan.txt database.
Likewise, "Radical" has special meaning. CJK Radicals are found in two
places, in the "Kangxi Radic
From: Michael Norton (a.k.a. Flarn) <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
What's an ideograph? Also, what's a radical?
Are they the same thing?
Some radicals (in the Han script) may be ideographs, but most ideographs are
not radicals: they often (not always) combine 1 or more radicals, with 1 or
more strokes that
Mark Davis said (in reference to a long set of comments by
Philippe Verdy on this thread):
> The statements below are incorrect
And Philippe asked:
> Which "statements"? My message is mostly a read as a question, not as an
> affirmation...
And I will attempt the fact-finding...
> CGJ is a com
Philippe Verdy responded to John Cowan:
> From: "John Cowan" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > the need to encode Dutch
> > ij as a single character, which is neither necessary nor practical.
> > (U+0132 and U+0133 are encoded for compatibility only.) In cases where
> > ij is a digraph in Dutch text, i+ZWN
On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 16:06:42 -0500, Clark Cox <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote
> and contains, as a radical the character å(U+5973), which means
> "woman".
That, of course, should have been â(U+2F25)
--
Clark S. Cox III
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://www.livejournal.com/users/clarkcox3/
http://homepage.mac.
From: "Otto Stolz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Just because the âstâ ligature is so uncommon (and the long âÅâ with its
âÅtâ ligature is almost extinct), I was looking for an example involving
âflâ, or âfiâ).
with ff :
affable, baffe, biffer, Buffy, affriolant, effaroucher, effacer, ...
with ffl :
ef
Otoo Stolz asked:
> In German, however, a ligature must not span a syllable break.
> How should I code plain text, w.r.t. hyphenation and ligatures?
> - "Huf" + ZWNJ + "lattich"
> - "Huf" + SYH + "lattich"
> - "Huf" + SYH + ZWNJ + "lattich"
> - "Huf" + ZWNJ + SYH + "lattich"
You should code it as
On Mon, 29 Nov 2004 15:13:51 -0500, Flarn <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> What's an ideograph?
An ideograph (aka ideogram) is (from www.m-w.com):
"a picture or symbol used in a system of writing to represent a thing
or an idea but not a particular word or phrase for it"
> Also, what's a radical?
A
Wachs-tube (growth tube)
Not the common reading of this. However, a "growth tube" or "growing tube"
might be an implement in some specialized context. But note that such
compounds might also be formed with 'Wuchs-', perhaps even preferentially so.
Therefore, reading 'Wachs-' as "wax", as Otto p
From: "Otto Stolz" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Note that there is no algorithm to reliably derive the position of the
syllable break from the spelling of a Word. You could even concoct pairs
of homographs that differ only in the position of the syllable break
(and, consequently, in their respective meaning
What's an ideograph? Also, what's a radical?
Are they the same thing?
- Michael Norton (a.k.a. Flarn)
E-mail address: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of John Hudson
> Sent: Sunday, November 28, 2004 2:55 AM
> To: 'Unicode Mailing List'
> Subject: Re: No Invisible Character - NBSP at the start of a word
>
>
> Jony Rosenne wrote:
>
> >>Jony, what do
On 29/11/2004 14:52, Otto Stolz wrote:
...
Note that there is no algorithm to reliably derive the position of the
syllable break from the spelling of a Word. You could even concoct pairs
of homographs that differ only in the position of the syllable break
(and, consequently, in their respective mea
Hello,
I had written:
Note that there is no algorithm to reliably derive the position of the
syllable break from the spelling of a Word. You could even concoct pairs
of homographs that differ only in the position of the syllable break
(and, consequently, in their respective meaning). So far, I have
Hi,
Philippe Verdy had written:
For example, a ligaturing opportunity can be encoded explicitly
in the French word "efficace": "ef"+ZWJ+"f"+ZWJ+"icace". [...]
in French there's a possible hyphenation at the first occurence,
where it is also a syllable break, but not for the second occurence
that oc
Message original
Sujet:
Re: Re: Relationship between Unicode and 10646]
Date:
Mon, 29 Nov 2004 10:17:34 +0100
De:
Philippe Verdy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Hurry Up! Last Chance for the
Professionals!
Keeping in view the request received from the various
professionals across the country, editorial committee has decided to extend the
last date of receipt of full paper for International CALIBER 2005 from
30th November 2004 to 15th December
20
From: "Patrick Andries" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Enfin, je ne suis plus si sûr que les sociétés américaines considèrent
encore
Unicode comme quelque chose de stratégique, il s'agit surtout d'efforts
individuels
de la part de techniciens passionés dans ces entreprises, passionnés qu'on
laisse
encore f
36 matches
Mail list logo
