RE: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

+1 Erkki I. Kolehmainen Mannerheimintie 75 B 37, 00270 Helsinki, Finland Mob: +358400825943, Fax: +35813318116 Lähettäjä: Unicode [mailto:unicode-boun...@unicode.org] Puolesta Mark Davis ?? Lähetetty: 4. huhtikuuta 2017 19:58 Vastaanottaja: verdy_p Kopio: Michael Everson; Garth Wallace;

Re: PETSCII mapping?

On 6 April 2017 at 11:32, Rebecca Bettencourt wrote: We do have to provide Unicode with fonts, I believe. We can use an existing > C64 font, such as Pet Me. Or, we can create a new font with vectorized > versions of the characters. > Are there any existing C64 fonts with

Re: PETSCII mapping?

The Wikipedia page for PETSCII [1] only marks 20 characters as not having Unicode equivalents; 2px (light) and 3px (heavy) horizontal and vertical bars at various non-center positions, diagonal shading characters, and corner characters. I’ve done some processing to the table on [1] to filter out

Re: Coloured Punctuation and Annotation

> The hieroglyphs don't have the emoji property What does the emoji property mean, semantically? That the codepoint represents a pictograph or that vendors have “permission” to give it a colored, stylized representation? If we go with the first, then hieroglyphs should certainly be emoji.

Re: PETSCII mapping?

Rebecca Bettencourt wrote: > I'm all willing to help put together a proposal for encoding missing block > element characters, but I would need other people to a) gather evidence of > use in plain text and b) write up the proposal in Unicode's formal language > since I've never proposed characters

Re: Coloured Punctuation and Annotation

On Thu, 6 Apr 2017 01:11:09 +0100 Michael Everson wrote: > On 5 Apr 2017, at 22:48, Richard Wordingham > wrote: > > > I tried to read it from UTS#51 ‘Unicode Emoji', which is not part > > of TUS, but I couldn't deduce that a font that

Re: PETSCII mapping?

On 6 April 2017 at 09:44, James Kass wrote: > Rebecca Bettencourt wrote, > > > I can put together a unified chart, with mappings to Unicode where > > they exist. In fact I think I'll do that. :) > > I hope you do. That would be a good starting point. > I'm working on

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On 2017/04/05 23:49, Michael Everson wrote: Oh, here is the answer to your question. It took me 15 seconds to change the background and text colour in Quark XPress. It has nothing to do with the proposal for variation sequences.

Re: Emoji Compatibility Symbols

Charlotte Buff : > > That document was very helpful, but unfortunately many of the images are > missing. would fix that.

Re: PETSCII mapping?

On 6 April 2017 at 09:44, James Kass wrote: > Rebecca Bettencourt wrote, > > > I can put together a unified chart, with mappings to Unicode where > > they exist. In fact I think I'll do that. :) > > I hope you do. That would be a good starting point. > The Wikipedia

Re: PETSCII mapping?

Rebecca Bettencourt wrote, > I can put together a unified chart, with mappings to Unicode where > they exist. In fact I think I'll do that. :) I hope you do. That would be a good starting point. > I'm all willing to help put together a proposal for encoding missing > block element characters,

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On 6 Apr 2017, at 02:05, Kent Karlsson wrote: >> Do generic font makers intend to support both graphic terminal emulation and >> chess? > > I don't know. But it should not be impossible to do so. And you think the proposal as it does leads to that? >> Should chess

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On 6 Apr 2017, at 01:54, Kent Karlsson wrote: >>> - some bidi fix [preferably making the box/border drawing characters bidi >>> "L", if possible; otherwise a caveat that if there is an expectation to >>> paste in such a board into an RTL document, bidi controls need

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

Den 2017-04-06 02:47, skrev "Michael Everson" : > Well, see my follow-up to James Kass and evaluate the merits of the two > choices. > Do generic font makers intend to support both graphic terminal > emulation and chess? I don't know. But it should not be impossible to do

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

Den 2017-04-06 01:25, skrev "Michael Everson" : >> - some bidi fix [preferably making the box/border drawing characters bidi >> "L", if possible; otherwise a caveat that >>if there is an expectation to paste in such a board into an RTL document, >> bidi controls need

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On 6 Apr 2017, at 01:53, Kent Karlsson wrote: > >> Oh, you misunderstood me. I knew it was raw HTML. I didn¹t expect it to >> render. But it was meaningless code. > > It was a response to Marcus, in that HTML might be used (with existing > characters and no VSs) to

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

Den 2017-04-06 01:25, skrev "Michael Everson" : > Oh, you misunderstood me. I knew it was raw HTML. I didn¹t expect it to > render. But it was meaningless code. It was a response to Marcus, in that HTML might be used (with existing characters and no VSs) to format chess

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

Well, see my follow-up to James Kass and evaluate the merits of the two choices. Do generic font makers intend to support both graphic terminal emulation and chess? Should chess font makers be burdened with graphic terminal emulation glyphs they know nothing about? > On 6 Apr 2017, at 01:31,

Re: PETSCII mapping?

On 4/5/2017 4:49 PM, James Kass wrote: Asmus Freytag wrote, There's no need for inflammatory rhetoric. Indeed not. How fortunate we are that nobody has posted any. Indeed. Grabbed the wrong item from my word bin today. A./ Best regards, James Kass

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

Exactly. /K Den 2017-04-06 01:25, skrev "Michael Everson" : > 2581 FE00; Chessboard box drawing; # LOWER ONE EIGHTH BLOCK > 258F FE00; Chessboard box drawing; # LEFT ONE EIGHTH BLOCK > 2594 FE00; Chessboard box drawing; # UPPER ONE EIGHTH BLOCK > 2595 FE00; Chessboard box

Re: Coloured Punctuation and Annotation

On 4/5/2017 5:14 PM, Michael Everson wrote: On 5 Apr 2017, at 23:16, Asmus Freytag wrote: Do you have any examples of plain text that is rendered with parts of characters having white (opaque) background? I'm not aware of any There are certainly MSS (in many languages)

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On 6 Apr 2017, at 00:12, James Kass wrote: > > Kent Karlsson wrote, > >> - with the extra requirement to have VSs also for the boarder line drawing >> characters (to make them fit for drawing chess board boarders, in a general >> purpose font), and > > This doesn't

Re: Coloured Punctuation and Annotation

> On 5 Apr 2017, at 23:16, Asmus Freytag wrote: > > Do you have any examples of plain text that is rendered with parts of > characters having white (opaque) background? > > I'm not aware of any There are certainly MSS (in many languages) where some punctuation made of

Re: PETSCII mapping?

I agree with Rebecca. It’s going to be a handful of characters, used by the handful of people who use legacy character sets. Those people exist (I run Mac OS 9 regularly because it’s necessary for some of my work) and since some of these legacy characters are encoded, it makes sense to make

Re: Coloured Punctuation and Annotation

On 5 Apr 2017, at 22:48, Richard Wordingham wrote: > I tried to read it from UTS#51 ‘Unicode Emoji', which is not part of TUS, but > I couldn't deduce that a font that enables U+10B99 PSALTER PAHLAVI SECTION > MARK to have exactly two (as opposed to none or

Re: PETSCII mapping?

Asmus Freytag wrote, > There's no need for inflammatory rhetoric. Indeed not. How fortunate we are that nobody has posted any. Best regards, James Kass

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On 5 Apr 2017, at 22:13, Kent Karlsson wrote: > > Kent, I can’t read this in a plain-text e-mail. > > Well, it was SUPPOSED to be explicit HTML code in the email. It was NOT the > intent that the given example was to be > rendered directly in the email (even

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

Kent Karlsson wrote, > - with the extra requirement to have VSs also for the boarder line > drawing characters (to make them fit for drawing chess board > boarders, in a general purpose font), and This doesn't seem necessary. A general purpose font modified to display the chess board in plain

Re: Coloured Punctuation and Annotation

Do you have any examples of plain text that is rendered with parts of characters having white (opaque) background? I'm not aware of any, A./ On 4/5/2017 2:48 PM, Richard Wordingham wrote: In topic 'Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation', on Wed, 5 Apr 2017

Re: PETSCII mapping?

On 4/5/2017 2:25 PM, Rebecca T wrote: > If there's a credible need to convert files between Unicode-based systems and > those using PETSCII There is! It’s called “sharing textual information” and it’s how our society functions. Can we afford to blithely abandon data from the best selling

Coloured Punctuation and Annotation

In topic 'Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation', on Wed, 5 Apr 2017 03:05:16 -0700 Asmus Freytag wrote: > On 4/5/2017 1:10 AM, Richard Wordingham wrote: > > A piece with a *white* background is different to a piece that is > > merely an

Re: PETSCII mapping?

> If there's a credible need to convert files between Unicode-based systems and > those using PETSCII There is! It’s called “sharing textual information” and it’s how our society functions. Can we afford to blithely abandon data from the best selling computer in history [1] because nobody cared

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

Den 2017-04-05 16:48, skrev "Michael Everson" : Kent, I can¹t read this in a plain-text e-mail. Well, it was SUPPOSED to be explicit HTML code in the email. It was NOT the intent that the given example was to be rendered directly in the email (even if you have HTML

Re: PETSCII mapping?

You can find charts of complete PETSCII character sets here: http://www.kreativekorp.com/software/fonts/c64.shtml The missing characters are a handful of block elements: upper fractional blocks (Unicode only has lower), halves of MEDIUM SHADE, checkerboards and diagonals. I can put together a

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

2017-04-05 21:32 GMT+02:00 Michael Everson : > It’s wonderful that Mr Verdy opposes my proposal. I must be doing > something right. > > On 5 Apr 2017, at 20:13, Philippe Verdy wrote: > > > 2017-04-05 18:28 GMT+02:00 William_J_G Overington < >

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

>> As it happens, Quest text also has eight glyphs for producing a border, all >> eight being in the Private Use Area. They are rather ornate. They are at >> U+E5B0 through to U+E5B7. Michael Everson wrote: > They are there. I had to figure out how the should be used. They are put > together

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

It’s wonderful that Mr Verdy opposes my proposal. I must be doing something right. On 5 Apr 2017, at 20:13, Philippe Verdy wrote: > 2017-04-05 18:28 GMT+02:00 William_J_G Overington : > For example, where WOMAN ZWJ ROCKET produces a glyph for a

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

2017-04-05 18:28 GMT+02:00 William_J_G Overington : > For example, where WOMAN ZWJ ROCKET produces a glyph for a LADY ASTRONAUT, > thus a change of meaning and I think that it went to UTC as there was a > change of meaning but I am not congruently sure of that.. > >

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

Asmus Freytag wrote: > There's no need to use a ZWJ, because there's no existing other use of a > square before a chess piece that needs to be preserved. Well, whether there is a need to use a ZWJ or no need to use a ZWJ is not here the issue. Asmus wrote before: > > > - relying

Re: PETSCII mapping?

On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 3:18 AM, Asmus Freytag wrote: > Unicode is not an archive of anything ever used on computers. > Why not? Isn't one of Unicode's goals to support the conversion of documents using legacy character sets into Unicode? I do not understand why, say, the

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On 5 Apr 2017, at 11:05, Asmus Freytag wrote: > Actually, I'm now leaning towards a preference for any scheme that does not > use VS, but relies on ligatures. This would make editing the text more difficult and would yield less legible results in environments where the

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

> On 5 Apr 2017, at 16:25, Asmus Freytag wrote: > >> http://evertype.com/standards/unicode-list/looking-glass-yellow-blue.png >> > This matches the reply I gave Richard. Very nice. 15 seconds’ work, too. > I think you could achieve the same with using just ligatures (no

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On 4/5/2017 7:49 AM, Michael Everson wrote: A piece with a *white* background is different to a piece that is merely an outline, whether filled or not. I don’t think I can consider your comments to be

Re: Encoding of old compatibility characters

I have got MS Word 2002 and MS Excel 2000. Maybe, later versions bring an amended version of Arial Unicode MS. Maybe. A./

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On 4/5/2017 5:22 AM, William_J_G Overington wrote: Asmus Freytag wrote: - relying solely on ligatures has the benefit of not involving the UTC at all, therefore it could be implemented today without delay). I am wondering whether that is correct. Where one implements a ligature using a

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On 5 Apr 2017, at 15:52, Garth Wallace wrote: > […] I'm just saying that if having symbols without VS not match either of the > VSes is a sticking point, it's not hard to work around. Oh, I see.  Well, yes, I agree with you in part. But here’s the thing. It is

Re: Encoding of old compatibility characters

Helo, Am 31.03.2017 um 09:57 schrieb Eli Zaretskii: Arial Unicode MS supports that character [U+23E8], FWIW. From: Otto Stolz Date: Tue, 4 Apr 2017 15:21:02 +0200 Not on my good ole Wndows XP SP3 system. On 4/4/2017 7:58 AM, Eli Zaretskii wrote: This here is

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 7:14 AM Michael Everson wrote: > Argh, Garth… please don’t shoot down our own proposal… I'm not, I'm just saying that if having symbols without VS not match either of the VSes is a sticking point, it's not hard to work around. > > > > On 5 Apr

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On 5 Apr 2017, at 09:10, Richard Wordingham > wrote: > Now, what happens to the two scheme if rendered with yellow text > ('foreground') on a blue background? The same thing that happens to ANY graphic character if you

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

Kent, I can’t read this in a plain-text e-mail. I can’t paste it into an ordinary word-processor like Word as in my previous response to Markus, or in Pages (left) or LibreOffice (right) as shown here. (I simply pasted in the text from Word to each of those. It’s odd to see that there is some

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

NOTE: A number of messages I sent in the last two days were scrubbed by the Unicode list software because they contained images. I will re-send these with links now. From: William_J_G Overington > Date: 2 April 2017 at 12:05:03 IST

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

Asmus Freytag wrote: > - relying solely on ligatures has the benefit of not involving the UTC > at all, therefore it could be implemented today without delay). I am wondering whether that is correct. Where one implements a ligature using a ZWJ without the Unicode Technical Committee

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On 5 Apr 2017, at 04:50, Richard Wordingham wrote: >> Why would anyone make a font that supports the variants for drawing >> chessboards (which require the encoded characters 2654..265F) not put in >> glyphs for those? > > A stop-gap font based on poor

Re: Combining Class of Thai Nonspacing_Marks

On 4/4/2017 9:37 PM, Richard Wordingham wrote: You may wish to note that it can be very hard to tell the difference between U+002D HYPHEN-MINUS and U+2013 EN DASH in file names. Or try LATIN SMALL LETTER I followed by COMBINING DOT ABOVE... A./

Re: PETSCII mapping?

On 4/5/2017 1:18 AM, Elias Mårtenson wrote: I have been searching, trying to find some information as to why there is a large set of symbols in PETSCII which cannot be mapped to Unicode. PETSCII is the character set used by

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On 4/5/2017 1:10 AM, Richard Wordingham wrote: On Mon, 3 Apr 2017 20:33:55 +0100 Richard Wordingham wrote: On Sun, 2 Apr 2017 10:43:39 -0700 Asmus Freytag wrote: The basic text elements in the scheme other than boundary markers will be:

Re: Combining Class of Thai Nonspacing_Marks

On 4/4/2017 8:00 PM, Gerriet M. Denkmann wrote: On 4 Apr 2017, at 00:00,Asmus Freytag wrote: It is not possible to construct a set of secure network identifiers based on simply a) ensuring the string is in NFC b) otherwise allowing all of the Thai characters (insofar as

PETSCII mapping?

I have been searching, trying to find some information as to why there is a large set of symbols in PETSCII which cannot be mapped to Unicode. PETSCII is the character set used by the Commodore 64, which was an incredibly popular computer in the 80's, and still remains in use to this day. More

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On Mon, 3 Apr 2017 20:33:55 +0100 Richard Wordingham wrote: > On Sun, 2 Apr 2017 10:43:39 -0700 > Asmus Freytag wrote: > The basic text elements in the scheme other than boundary markers will > be: > > empty white square > empty black