15.8.2011 0:47, Asmus Freytag wrote:
Not all documents are HTML or CSS.
The Numericana page that was cited argues for using Symbol font on web
pages, and I showed a few errors in its argumentation in that respect.
I also wrote: “However, it might be argued that the Symbol font has been
used
On 08/15/2011 01:48 AM, Richard Wordingham wrote:
is strictly speaking *the* sequence recommended *across* Indic
scripts for representation of Sanskrit clusters involving a nasal
and non-nasal "semivowel".
However, people working with Indic rendering in a major operating
system support the c
The whole point of so-called symbol fonts is to allow (non-Unicode)
applications to display these symbols while acting as though they are
displaying ordinary Latin-1 text. It would be counterproductive for makers of
such fonts to include, as it were, a health warning that the font should not be
2011/8/14 Richard Wordingham :
> On Sat, 6 Aug 2011 17:25:11 -0700
> tulasi wrote:
>
>> - Why did Unicode Inc copies some letters/symbols from Greek-script
>> irresponsibly and renamed as Latin-script?
>> - Why din't it (Unicode Inc) use same Greek letters/symbols?
>
> U+00B5 MICRO SIGN i
On 8/14/2011 12:51 PM, Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
14.8.2011 17:51, Doug Ewell wrote:
This sounds like Jukka expects browsers to analyze the glyph assigned in
the font to the code position for 'a' and decline to display it if it
doesn't look enough like an 'a' (rejecting, for example, Greek 'α'). I
On 8/14/2011 1:39 PM, Richard Wordingham wrote:
U+00B5 MICRO SIGN is an ISO-8859-1 character, and was therefore
included as U+00B5. It normally precedes a Latin-script letter, and
therefore it actually makes sense to treat it as a Latin-script
character, and possibly give it a different shape i
On Sat, 6 Aug 2011 17:25:11 -0700
tulasi wrote:
>- Why did Unicode Inc copies some letters/symbols from Greek-script
>irresponsibly and renamed as Latin-script?
>- Why din't it (Unicode Inc) use same Greek letters/symbols?
U+00B5 MICRO SIGN is an ISO-8859-1 character, and was therefo
On Sun, 14 Aug 2011 19:59:30 +0530
Shriramana Sharma wrote:
> On 08/14/2011 06:02 PM, Richard Wordingham wrote:
> > On Fri, 24 Jun 2011 18:24:01 +0530
> > Shriramana Sharma wrote:
> >
> >> The point is that the sequence:
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> is strictly speaking *the* sequence recommended *acros
14.8.2011 17:51, Doug Ewell wrote:
This sounds like Jukka expects browsers to analyze the glyph assigned in
the font to the code position for 'a' and decline to display it if it
doesn't look enough like an 'a' (rejecting, for example, Greek 'α'). I'm
not sure that is a reasonable expectation.
> Submitting a doc to UTC is a basic requirement. The issue also needs to make
> it onto the agenda of a UTC meeting, and it helps to have a champion to make
> sure that happens and that can be available to discuss the issue with the
> UTC. These things are much easier if you are a member of the
On Sat, Aug 13, 2011 at 08:01:28PM +0200, mmarx wrote:
> part2 of Syriac people writing language A in script B
>
>
> Nowadays its the other way round:
> many members of the Syriac communities have
> difficulties reading their "own" script, so both
> the Orthodoxe and the Catholic church have
> pr
Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
The reason why ever “worked” in HTML documents
was the sloppy implementation of browsers—they applied a font without
even checking whether the font actually contains the characters in
content. So instead of deciding that a
cannot possibly be rendered using the Symbol fon
Philippe Verdy wrote:
Isn't there also a new datafile with beta status, that lists the
usage of characters shared by multiple scripts ?
That's the "provisional data file called ScriptExtensions" that Peter
mentioned.
--
Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA | RFC 5645, 4645, UTN #14
www.ewel
On 08/14/2011 06:02 PM, Richard Wordingham wrote:
On Fri, 24 Jun 2011 18:24:01 +0530
Shriramana Sharma wrote:
The point is that the sequence:
is strictly speaking *the* sequence recommended *across* Indic
scripts for representation of Sanskrit clusters involving a nasal and
non-nasal "semiv
Isn't there also a new datafile with beta status, that lists the usage
of characters shared by multiple scripts ? If so, it should also
concern the Arabic-Syriac number sign (actually an abbreviated
ligature of the Arabic word for year, with a subtended stroke that can
span below several digits app
On Fri, 24 Jun 2011 18:24:01 +0530
Shriramana Sharma wrote:
> The point is that the sequence:
>
>
>
> is strictly speaking *the* sequence recommended *across* Indic
> scripts for representation of Sanskrit clusters involving a nasal and
> non-nasal "semivowel".
Could you please quote me chapt
16 matches
Mail list logo
