On 23 Jul 2015, at 00:54, Richard Wordingham
richard.wording...@ntlworld.com wrote:
On Wed, 22 Jul 2015 12:21:32 +0200 (CEST)
Marcel Schneider charupd...@orange.fr wrote:
On 22 Jul 2015, at 09:52, Richard Wordingham wrote:
We never thought of common hieroglyphs otherwise as running
On 16 Jul 2015, at 11:21, Marcel Schneider charupd...@orange.fr wrote:
On 16 Jul 2015, at 10:35, Hans Aberg haber...@telia.com wrote:
Using Unicode helps the readability of the input file, though. One can use
for example ConTeXt with LuaLaTeX, which comes with the TeX live
On 16 Jul 2015, at 10:29, Marcel Schneider charupd...@orange.fr wrote:
On Sat, Jul 11, 2015, at 20:54, Hans Aberg haber...@telia.com wrote:
On 15 Jul 2015, at 11:06, Marcel Schneider charupd...@orange.fr wrote:
Editing keyboard layouts is a job anybody can tackle who is willing
On 16 Jul 2015, at 11:53, Marcel Schneider charupd...@orange.fr wrote:
On 16 Jul 2015, at 10:35, Hans Aberg haber...@telia.com wrote:
One still has to figure out a good map.
Yes this is the primary issue for every newly encoded script, and it remains
important with respect
On 16 Jul 2015, at 13:13, William_J_G Overington wjgo_10...@btinternet.com
wrote:
I do not know if it is of interest, but some time ago I produced some pdf
files that can each be used as a typecase so as to copy a character from the
pdf, then paste into a Unicode-aware wordprocessor or
On 16 Jul 2015, at 16:44, Marcel Schneider charupd...@orange.fr wrote:
On 16 Jul 2015, at 13:21, Hans Aberg haber...@telia.com wrote:
Knowing nothing about, I mixed up ConTeXt you referred to, and ConTEXT, and
ended up downloading and istalling a new text editor. At least, this time
On 16 Jul 2015, at 16:44, Marcel Schneider charupd...@orange.fr wrote:
On 16 Jul 2015, at 15:20, Hans Aberg haber...@telia.com wrote:
It may suffice with a logical layout, letters in alphabetical order. The
traditional layouts were designed for speed typing on physical typing
machines
On 16 Jul 2015, at 18:33, Eli Zaretskii e...@gnu.org wrote:
From: Hans Aberg haber...@telia.com
Date: Thu, 16 Jul 2015 18:21:59 +0200
Cc: Unicode Mailing List unicode@unicode.org
One needs a good UTF-8 text editor as well.
Emacs is one possibility, of course.
And on OS X, Xcode has
On 15 Jul 2015, at 11:06, Marcel Schneider charupd...@orange.fr wrote:
Editing keyboard layouts is a job anybody can tackle who is willing to spend
some time for a useful work (as opposed to a set of leisures like gaming,
chasing and the like).
In mathematics, there are a couple of
On 11 Jul 2015, at 18:36, Johannes Bergerhausen johan...@bergerhausen.com
wrote:
As I said at TEDx in Vienna:
[https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=IRdupNXpm8k]
The keyboards for different languages are essentially the same nowadays: it
sends a code indicating which button is acted on and
On 12 May 2015, at 16:50, Philippe Verdy verd...@wanadoo.fr wrote:
Indeed, that is why UTF-8 was invented for use in Unix-like environments.
Not the main reason: communication protocols, and data storage is also based
on 8-bit code units (even if storage group them by much larger
On 12 May 2015, at 15:45, Philippe Verdy verd...@wanadoo.fr wrote:
2015-05-11 23:53 GMT+02:00 Hans Aberg haber...@telia.com:
It is perfectly fine considering the Unicode code points as abstract
integers, with UTF-32 and UTF-8 encodings that translate them into byte
sequences
On 11 May 2015, at 19:44, Doug Ewell d...@ewellic.org wrote:
Hans Aberg haberg dash 1 at telia dot com wrote:
However I wonder what would be the effect of D80 in UTF-32: is
0x a valid 32-bit string ?
The value 0x cannot appear in a UTF-32 string. Therefore it
cannot
On 11 May 2015, at 21:25, Philippe Verdy verd...@wanadoo.fr wrote:
Yes, but this does not mean that 0xFFF cannot be used as a (32-bit) code
unit in 32-bit strings, even if it is not a valid code point with a valid
scaar value in any legacy or standard version of UTF-32.
The reason I
On 10 May 2015, at 12:23, Richard Wordingham
richard.wording...@ntlworld.com wrote:
However I wonder what would be the effect of D80 in UTF-32: is
0x a valid 32-bit string ?
The value 0x cannot appear in a UTF-32 string. Therefore it
cannot represent a unit of encoded
On 14 Apr 2015, at 02:21, Garth Wallace gwa...@gmail.com wrote:
On Monday, April 13, 2015, Hans Aberg haber...@telia.com wrote:
On 13 Apr 2015, at 23:18, Garth Wallace gwa...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm much further along on my research for a proposal to encode
heterodox chess symbols. I
On 13 Apr 2015, at 23:18, Garth Wallace gwa...@gmail.com wrote:
I'm much further along on my research for a proposal to encode
heterodox chess symbols. I asked about terms for rotations last
November and was told that the terms in use in the standard are
CLOCKWISE-ROTATED and
On 31 Mar 2015, at 05:09, Asmus Freytag (t) asmus-...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
On 3/30/2015 1:54 PM, Hans Aberg wrote:
On 30 Mar 2015, at 00:49, Asmus Freytag (t) asmus-...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
It would be worth to bring the collection of music symbols up to a more
comprehensive set in one
On 30 Mar 2015, at 00:49, Asmus Freytag (t) asmus-...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
It would be worth to bring the collection of music symbols up to a more
comprehensive set in one go, rather than to do it piecemeal.
There is a similar issue to that of the math symbols, namely, one might add
some
, but the
microtonal offsets larger.
Johnny
On Mar 30, 2015, at 4:54 PM, Hans Aberg haber...@telia.com wrote:
The same problem arises in Arab music notation,
___
Unicode mailing list
Unicode@unicode.org
http://unicode.org/mailman/listinfo/unicode
On 31 Mar 2015, at 00:06, Doug Ewell d...@ewellic.org wrote:
Johnny Farraj johnnyfarraj at yahoo dot com wrote:
The Arabic half-flat and half-sharp symbols do not mean exact
quartertones, but that's understood by Arabic music performers as the
exact intonation is then learned by ear.
On 31 Mar 2015, at 00:48, Johnny Farraj johnnyfar...@yahoo.com wrote:
That's a good point. I was thinking in the confines of equal temperament.
The basis for music from Middle Ages, from West down to Persia at least, is the
Pythagorean tuning. Then in Western art music, CPP (Common Practise
On 30 Mar 2015, at 00:07, Werner LEMBERG w...@gnu.org wrote:
You should check the Standard Music Font Layout (SmuFL) for details;
it also has a freely available font that covers it.
http://www.smufl.org
The recent version of the specification can be found at
On 29 Mar 2015, at 22:02, Garth Wallace gwa...@gmail.com wrote:
The most common symbol for the quarter tone flat, from what I've gathered, is
a reversed flat sign. Some composers use the flat with stroke. One potential
complication: AIUI the Arel-Ezgi-Uzdilek system for notating Turkish
On 9 Feb 2015, at 19:17, Ken Whistler kenwhist...@att.net wrote:
...
The use in C of = and == was badly designed
from the start, and is the source of bezillions of inadvertent programming
errors in practice.
It is the ample oversupply of implicit conversions in combination with the lack
of
On 10 Jun 2014, at 14:29, Philippe Verdy verd...@wanadoo.fr wrote:
ℕ ⊃ℤ ⊃ℚ ⊃ℝ ⊃ℂ are without doubt more useful and more common in double-struck
styles than in Fraktur styles.
Fraktur would normally be for Lie algebras. For sets, some other style or none.
And logicians use their own notation.
On 5 Jun 2014, at 04:50, David Starner prosfil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Wed, Jun 4, 2014 at 6:00 AM, Jukka K. Korpela jkorp...@cs.tut.fi wrote:
The change is logical in the sense that bold face is a
more original notation and double-struck letters as characters imitate the
imitation of boldface
On 5 Jun 2014, at 17:46, Jeff Senn s...@maya.com wrote:
That is: are identifiers merely sequences of characters or intended to be
comparable as “Unicode strings” (under some sort of compatibility rule)?
In computer languages, identifiers are normally compared only for equality, as
it reduces
On 5 Jun 2014, at 19:24, Jeff Senn s...@maya.com wrote:
On Jun 5, 2014, at 12:41 PM, Hans Aberg haber...@telia.com wrote:
On 5 Jun 2014, at 17:46, Jeff Senn s...@maya.com wrote:
That is: are identifiers merely sequences of characters or intended to be
comparable as “Unicode strings
On 4 Jun 2014, at 15:00, Jukka K. Korpela jkorp...@cs.tut.fi wrote:
2014-06-04 15:32, Hans Aberg wrote under Subject: Re: Swift:
On 4 Jun 2014, at 13:58, Leonardo Boiko leobo...@namakajiri.net
wrote:
I don't think this feature saw much use, since programmers in a
global world can't
On 10 Sep 2013, at 21:04, Asmus Freytag asm...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
On 9/10/2013 11:05 AM, Michael Everson wrote:
On 10 Sep 2013, at 18:01, Asmus Freytag asm...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
This rationale is absent in document WG2 N3907 that requests these
characters.
Therefore, it seems these
On 13 Aug 2012, at 18:09, Andreas Prilop wrote:
On Mon, 13 Aug 2012, Karl Pentzlin wrote:
The problem I am confronted with is that this character shares
its German name Raute with the #
I learnt in 7th grade what “Raute” means.
“#” is not a Raute.
The center field of “#” is called Raute
On 23 Jul 2012, at 07:54, Leif Halvard Silli wrote:
John W Kennedy, Wed, 18 Jul 2012 14:48:15 -0400:
On Jul 18, 2012, at 4:21 AM, Leif Halvard Silli wrote:
On my OS X 10.7 computer, then TextEdit does sniff UTF-8 (without the
BOM).
It does indeed have a sniffing feature, though it also
-78ba24467...@evertype.com
To: Michael Everson ever...@evertype.com
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1278)
On 13 Jul 2012, at 00:34, Michael Everson wrote:
On 12 Jul 2012, at 23:27, Hans Aberg wrote:
On 12 Jul 2012, at 23:47, Michael Everson wrote:
...
Is it in print?
...
If so, then it should
2D bee70f00-1c53-4d0c-8954-a94ec478f...@telia.com
380c6ab8-d40b-4d9d-af48-d01afab86...@evertype.com
To: Michael Everson ever...@evertype.com
X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1278)
On 13 Jul 2012, at 10:57, Michael Everson wrote:
On 13 Jul 2012, at 09:49, Hans Aberg wrote:
Local documents on your
to the list may not be on the list, though
that is not the case here.
On 2012-07-11, Hans Aberg haber...@telia.com wrote:
Unicode has added all the characters from TeX plus some, making it
possible to use characters in the input file where TeX is forced to
use ASCII. This though changes
On 12 Jul 2012, at 12:33, Julian Bradfield wrote:
In practice, no working mathematician is going to use the mathematical
alphanumerical symbols to write maths in (La)TeX, because it's
fantastically inconvenient compared to the usual way (supplementary
plane support is far from universal, and
On 12 Jul 2012, at 15:54, Julian Bradfield wrote:
On 2012-07-12, Hans Aberg haber...@telia.com wrote:
There are many characters that TeX users use that are not in
Unicode.
All standard characters from TeX, LaTeX, and AMSTeX should be there,
What's a standard character? There's
On 12 Jul 2012, at 16:06, Julian Bradfield wrote:
On 2012-07-12, Hans Aberg haber...@telia.com wrote:
On 12 Jul 2012, at 12:33, Julian Bradfield wrote:
In practice, no working mathematician is going to use the mathematical
alphanumerical symbols to write maths in (La)TeX, because it's
On 12 Jul 2012, at 19:24, Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
2012-07-12 19:31, Asmus Freytag wrote:
I don't see any problem in amending the proposed annotations
U+003A COLON
* also used to denote division or scale, for that usage 2236 : RATIO is
preferred in mathematical use
U+2236 RATIO
* Used
On 12 Jul 2012, at 21:03, Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
2012-07-12 21:07, Asmus Freytag wrote:
What the examples show from TeX is that colon and ratio cannot be
substituted for each other without affecting the display.
This looks like a problem in TeX rather than character standards. If TeX can
On 12 Jul 2012, at 23:20, Julian Bradfield wrote:
[If yo do not send an email directly to me, I may overlook seeing it, due to my
filtering system.]
Hans wrote:
On 12 Jul 2012, at 15:54, Julian Bradfield wrote:
..
Not to mention the symbols I've used from time to time, because
You tell
On 12 Jul 2012, at 23:47, Michael Everson wrote:
...
Is it in print?
...
If so, then it should be encoded.
There is a document The Comprehensive LaTeX Symbol List with a lot symbols.
In my installation from TeX Live http://www.tug.org/texlive/, it is in:
On 13 Jul 2012, at 00:10, Julian Bradfield wrote:
Latest version requires STIXFonts to be installed. Some other proof
assistants use it.
However, that's not true. Isabelle does not need to use Unicode; it
runs happily in an ASCII terminal, because its internal representation
is tokens,
On 12 Jul 2012, at 19:23, Asmus Freytag wrote:
Here's my *updated* summary of the annotations that we've been discussing so
far:
U+003A COLON
* also used to denote division or scale, for that usage 2236 : RATIO is
preferred in mathematical use
Perhaps the mathematical styles that exists
On 11 Jul 2012, at 03:01, Leif Halvard Silli wrote:
Hans Aberg, Tue, 10 Jul 2012 22:41:26 +0200:
On 10 Jul 2012, at 21:30, Asmus Freytag wrote:
On 7/10/2012 3:50 AM, Leif Halvard Silli wrote:
Asmus Freytag, Mon, 09 Jul 2012 19:32:47 -0700:
The European use (this is not limited
On 11 Jul 2012, at 02:05, Ken Whistler wrote:
Incidentally, one of the reasons the set of symbols in the U+2200
Mathematical Operators block got a somewhat different treatment than
generic punctuation or other symbols or combining marks, when it comes
to unification versus non-unification
On 11 Jul 2012, at 03:51, Khaled Hosny wrote:
It can be handled at a different level; when one types 3:5 in a
Unicode-complient TeX engine, what gets output to the output file is the
ratio not the colon, and colon gets output with 3\colon{}5.
Actually, TeX does it wrongly relative Unicode: a
On 11 Jul 2012, at 12:15, Leif Halvard Silli wrote:
Hans Aberg, Wed, 11 Jul 2012 10:20:11 +0200:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Obelus
Thanks. Scandinavia's history indicates that if known in Denmark,
Norway and Finland, then it should be known on Iceland and in Sweden
too.
I can't
On 11 Jul 2012, at 15:59, Khaled Hosny wrote:
On Wed, Jul 11, 2012 at 10:47:33AM +0200, Hans Aberg wrote:
On 11 Jul 2012, at 03:51, Khaled Hosny wrote:
It can be handled at a different level; when one types 3:5 in a
Unicode-complient TeX engine, what gets output to the output file
On 11 Jul 2012, at 16:33, Khaled Hosny wrote:
If I try the code below in lualatex, then the 푩 and the 퐁 both come
out typeset upright.
There is a “literal” mode in unicode-math package just for that, check
its manual for more details.
As for the ISO standards mentioned in section 5.2 Bold
On 11 Jul 2012, at 18:20, Julian Bradfield wrote:
On 2012-07-11, Hans Aberg haber...@telia.com wrote:
There are a number of other incompatibilities between original TeX and
Unicode:
For example, ASCII letters are in TeX math mode typeset in italics, but
Unicode has a mathematical italics
On 11 Jul 2012, at 19:30, Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
2012-07-11 19:33, Hans Aberg wrote:
There is a “literal” mode in unicode-math package just for that, check
its manual for more details.
As for the ISO standards mentioned in section 5.2 Bold style,
I’m sorry, I’ve lost the context
On 10 Jul 2012, at 21:30, Asmus Freytag wrote:
On 7/10/2012 3:50 AM, Leif Halvard Silli wrote:
Asmus Freytag, Mon, 09 Jul 2012 19:32:47 -0700:
The European use (this is not limited to Scandinavia)
Thanks. It seems to me that that this tradition is not without a link
to the (also) European
On 5 Feb 2012, at 05:03, john knightley wrote:
Yesterday I contacted the person claiming to be James Kass the maker of the
Code2000 series of fonts. The person using the account clearly is not James
Kass the maker of the font. When asked questions he restricts himself to
answers that can
On 11 Oct 2011, at 00:35, Philippe Verdy wrote:
2011/10/7 Hans Aberg haber...@telia.com:
On 7 Oct 2011, at 22:22, Murray Sargent wrote:
In the linear format of UTN #28, 1/2/3/4 builds up as ((1/2)/3)/4 as in
computer languages like C.
OK. I looked through the paper again, and could
There are several solidus (slash) variations. What is the intent of those, in
as much there been expressed, in a mathematical context?
For example, is U+2044 intended for rational numbers, and U+2215 a long
variation of U+002F, which can be used to disambiguate a/b/c/d as in a/b∕c/d =
On 7 Oct 2011, at 18:58, Murray Sargent wrote:
One set of examples of the use of these solidus variations occurs in the
mathematics linear format described in Unicode Technical Note #28
(http://www.unicode.org/notes/tn28/UTN28-PlainTextMath-v3.pdf). The ASCII
solidus (U+002F) described in
On 7 Oct 2011, at 19:39, Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
There are several solidus (slash) variations.
What is the intent of those, in as much there been expressed,
in a mathematical context?
Unicode mostly encodes characters that are in use or have been encoded in
other standards. While not
On 7 Oct 2011, at 21:16, Asmus Freytag wrote:
On 10/7/2011 11:27 AM, Hans Aberg wrote:
The context I have in mind is a computer that largely sticks to the ASCII
tradition, but otherwise uses new Unicode additions to make input more
math-like.
that's essentially the same goal as behind
On 7 Oct 2011, at 22:22, Murray Sargent wrote:
In the linear format of UTN #28, 1/2/3/4 builds up as ((1/2)/3)/4 as in
computer languages like C.
OK. I looked through the paper again, and could not find a description of that.
The notation actually started with C semantics and then added a
On 7 Oct 2011, at 22:29, Asmus Freytag wrote:
Murray's work comes from the desire to represent mathematical equations
faithfully, based nearly entirely on the semantics of the operators and
having those operators be represented as Unicode characters.
One solution that he uses is the use
On 15 Jun 2010, at 00:36, Stephen Slevinski wrote:
I believe the script is stabilized. In 2004, we were using the
International MovementWriting Alphabet. We learned a lot in 3 years
of use. In 2008, we did a major refactoring of the symbol set to
focus on sign language only. We've
On 9 Jun 2010, at 14:59, Doug Ewell wrote:
Can anyone point me to some *real-world* examples of mathematics
text encoded in Unicode, including (especially) the Mathematical
Alphanumeric Symbols starting at U+1D400?
I'm trying to determine compression characteristics for such text,
using
On 9 Jun 2010, at 19:55, John H. Jenkins wrote:
Unicode encodes characters, not glyphs. In order to separately
encode a hexadecimal-2 separately from an decimal-2, you'd either
have to show either that the two are, in fact, inherently different
characters (in which case you'd better be
On 5 Jun 2010, at 16:33, Otto Stolz wrote:
You may wonder, why I am using the term “hexadekadic”.
This is because, “hexadeka” is the Greek word for 16, ...
The URL http://translate.google.com/#en|el|sixteen produces
δεκαέξι, or dekaexi.
Hans
On 4 Jun 2010, at 20:39, Luke-Jr wrote:
Unicode has Roman numerals and bar counting (base 0); why should
base 16 be
denied unique characters?
Anyway, if you can show these John Nystrom Tonal System glyphs have
been in textual use, perhaps they should be encoded.
From another
On 5 Jun 2010, at 00:04, Luke-Jr wrote:
On Friday 04 June 2010 04:45:57 pm Hans Aberg wrote:
Hexadecimal representation is only used to give a compact
representation of binary numbers in connection of computers. In view
of modern fast computers, one only needs to write out numbers when
68 matches
Mail list logo
