On Sat, 27 Apr 2019 00:08:52 +
James Kass via Unicode wrote:
> On 2019-04-26 11:08 PM, Doug Ewell via Unicode wrote:
> > This is a small percentage of the number of fonts that have all
> > four of these Armenian glyphs, but show the abbreviation mark as a
> > spacing glyph. It looks like
Begin forwarded message:
Date: Fri, 19 Apr 2019 11:30:32 +0100
From: Richard Wordingham
To: Shriramana Sharma
Subject: Re: Latin Script Danda
On Fri, 19 Apr 2019 11:33:35 +0530
Shriramana Sharma via Unicode wrote:
> We are using the pipe character as it is readily available in our
>
On Fri, 19 Apr 2019 19:54:47 +0530
Shriramana Sharma wrote:
> Or maybe the Grantha candrabindu can be used, since there is already
> evidence for mixed usage of the scripts and nukta characters have been
> encoded for Tamil usage in the Grantha block for this same reason
> despite Grantha users
On Fri, 19 Apr 2019 11:36:16 +0530
Shriramana Sharma via Unicode wrote:
> On 4/19/19, Richard Wordingham via Unicode
> wrote:
> > That's a fair point. My problem is that someone is claiming of
> > U+0310 that "Somewhere in the Unicode specifications is a footnote
>
On Fri, 19 Apr 2019 01:52:15 +0200
Marius Spix via Unicode wrote:
> The Wikipedia page states, U+0310 is a general-purpose combining
> diacritical mark. I would treat it similar like U+0308 (COMBINING
> DIAERESIS) or U+030C (COMBINING CARON), which are both characters with
> multiple names and
Which character should one use for a danda in the Latin script? I
believed normal usage is to use U+0964 DEVANAGARI DANDA, but for some
reason its script extension property does not include the Latin script.
Richard.
Is there any reason why U+0310 COMBINING CANDRABINDU has scx=Inherited
rather than scx=Latn? The only language I've seen the character used
in is Sanskrit, and the only script I've seen it in is the Latin
script.
Richard.
On Sat, 23 Feb 2019 14:46:27 +0800
梁海 Liang Hai via Unicode wrote:
> USE wasn’t designed to allow such a syllable structure. Tai Tham’s
> being supported by USE is kind of an oversight. And although it’s
> appropriate to allow conjoined consonants to follow post-base-spacing
> vowel signs,
On Sat, 23 Feb 2019 14:46:27 +0800
梁海 Liang Hai via Unicode wrote:
> >>> once the USE acknowledges that subjoined consonants may follow
> >>> vowels
> >>
> >> I expect to update the USE spec to address this soon.
> >
> > That seems welcome news. I still don't know what the problem with
On Sat, 23 Feb 2019 14:46:27 +0800
梁海 Liang Hai via Unicode wrote:
> >>> once the USE acknowledges that subjoined consonants may follow
> >>> vowels
> >>
> >> I expect to update the USE spec to address this soon.
> >
> > That seems welcome news. I still don't know what the problem with
On Fri, 22 Feb 2019 22:19:25 +
Andrew Glass wrote:
> Thank you Richard for pointing out the issue with 0x1A7A
> I've looked into this and found an error in our tooling that has this
> mapped this to Halant. Based on the spec this should be VAbv. I've
> filed a bug.
Thanks. Will the
On Fri, 22 Feb 2019 09:07:06 +
Richard Wordingham via Unicode wrote:
> My best hypothesis (not thoroughly tested) is that Windows currently
> has InSc=Consonant_Killer, but can I look his up as opposed to
> effectively devising a test suite for USE on Office?
That question's rathe
Where can I find the InSc properties of characters as overridden for
the USE of Windows?
I am trying to work out why on MS Edge I am now getting dotted circles
before U+1A7A TAI THAM SIGN RA HAAM in all of:
ᩆᩢᨠ᩠ᨯᩥ᩺ rank /sak/ ,
ᨾᩉᩣᩉᩥᨦ᩠ᨣᩩ᩺ giant fennel /ma haː hiŋ/
and
ᩆᩣᩈ᩠ᨲᩕ᩺ science /saːt/
On Tue, 12 Feb 2019 13:50:00 +0100
Egmont Koblinger via Unicode wrote:
> For
> starter, I'd love to see a shell with interactive line editing (like
> bash, zsh),...
Bash already seems to handle proportional fonts quite well when run
under Emacs 'M-x shell', which is more than can be said for
On Sun, 10 Feb 2019 14:54:39 +0100
Philippe Verdy via Unicode wrote:
> Le sam. 9 févr. 2019 à 20:55, Egmont Koblinger via Unicode <
> unicode@unicode.org> a écrit :
>
> > Hi Asmus,
> >
> > > On quick reading this appears to be a strong argument why such
> > > emulators
> > will
> > >
On Sun, 10 Feb 2019 00:59:46 +0100
Egmont Koblinger via Unicode wrote:
> Is there such a monospace font obeying wcwidth (that is: double wide
> character for when a spacing mark is combined) for Devanagari?
For CV, that would correspond to a Hindi typewriter, so the odds look
good. The
On Sat, 9 Feb 2019 18:42:52 +0100
Egmont Koblinger via Unicode wrote:
> The
> problem that I don't know how to address is: What if harfbuzz tells us
> that the overall width for rendering a particular grapheme cluster is
> significantly different from its designated area (the number of
>
On Sat, 9 Feb 2019 22:29:31 +0100
Adam Borowski via Unicode wrote:
> On Sat, Feb 09, 2019 at 10:01:21PM +0200, Eli Zaretskii via Unicode
> wrote:
> > I don't know. Maybe it keeps a database of character combinations
> > that need shaping, each one with the maximum width on display the
> >
On Sat, 9 Feb 2019 22:31:37 +0100
Egmont Koblinger via Unicode wrote:
> Let's take the Devanagari improvement of the other day. Until now,
> there were plenty of dotted circles shown, and combining spacing marks
> that should've been placed before the letter were placed after the
> letter,
On Sat, 9 Feb 2019 13:02:55 -0800
"Asmus Freytag \(c\) via Unicode" wrote:
> To force Hindi crosswords mode you need to segment the string into
> syllables,
> each having a variable number of characters, and then assign a single
> display
> position to them. Now some syllables are wider than
On Sat, 9 Feb 2019 04:52:30 -0800
David Starner via Unicode wrote:
> Note that this is actually the only thing that stands out to me in
> Unicode not supporting older character sets; in PETSCII (Commodore
> 64), the high-bit character characters were the reverse (in this
> sense) of the low-bit
On Sat, 09 Feb 2019 09:42:09 +0200
Eli Zaretskii via Unicode wrote:
> > Date: Sat, 9 Feb 2019 00:18:14 +
> > From: Richard Wordingham via Unicode
> >
> > > For character composition, you must have a shaping engine to talk
> > > to, and the shap
On Fri, 8 Feb 2019 18:08:34 -0800
Asmus Freytag via Unicode wrote:
> On 2/8/2019 5:42 PM, James Kass via Unicode wrote:
> You are still making the assumption that selecting a different glyph
> for the base character would automatically lead to the selection of a
> different glyph for the
On Fri, 8 Feb 2019 14:26:28 -0800
Asmus Freytag via Unicode wrote:
> On 2/8/2019 2:08 PM, Richard Wordingham via Unicode wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Feb 2019 17:16:09 + (GMT)
> "wjgo_10...@btinternet.com via Unicode" wrote:
>
> Andrew West wrote:
>
> Just reminding
On Sat, 09 Feb 2019 00:16:30 +0200
Eli Zaretskii via Unicode wrote:
> > Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2019 21:55:58 +
> > From: Richard Wordingham via Unicode
> > I will give a concrete application. If I want to make a font that
> > is interpretable for Tai Tham and maximal
On Fri, 8 Feb 2019 22:29:57 +0100
Egmont Koblinger via Unicode wrote:
> Some terminal emulators have made up some new SGR modes, e.g. ESC[4:3m
> for curly underline. What to do with them? Where to draw the line what
> to add to Unicode and what not to? Will Unicode possibly be a
> bottleneck of
On Fri, 8 Feb 2019 17:16:09 + (GMT)
"wjgo_10...@btinternet.com via Unicode" wrote:
> Andrew West wrote:
>> Just reminding you that "The initial character in a variation
>> sequence
>> is never a nonspacing combining mark (gc=Mn) or a canonical
>> decomposable character" (The Unicode
On Fri, 08 Feb 2019 11:34:29 +0200
Eli Zaretskii via Unicode wrote:
> > Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2019 06:40:44 +
> > From: Richard Wordingham via Unicode
> >
> > > I, for one, am not to the slightest bit interested in abandoning
> > > the character grid
On Fri, 08 Feb 2019 15:45:15 +0200
Eli Zaretskii via Unicode wrote:
> > From: Egmont Koblinger
> > Date: Fri, 8 Feb 2019 13:30:42 +0100
> > Cc: Richard Wordingham ,
> > unicode Unicode Discussion
> >
> > Hi Eli,
> >
> > > Not sure why. There are terminal emulators out there which
> >
On Fri, 8 Feb 2019 00:38:24 +0100
Egmont Koblinger via Unicode wrote:
> I, for one, am not to the slightest bit interested in abandoning the
> character grid and allowing for proportional fonts. This would just
> break a gazillion of things.
The message I take from that and this thread in
On Thu, 07 Feb 2019 22:00:20 +0200
Eli Zaretskii via Unicode wrote:
> > From: Egmont Koblinger
> > Date: Thu, 7 Feb 2019 19:01:33 +0100
> > On Thu, Feb 7, 2019 at 6:53 PM Eli Zaretskii wrote:
> > > No, it needs no interaction. Unless the regexp doesn't work for
> > > you, which you should
On Thu, 7 Feb 2019 00:45:55 +0100
Egmont Koblinger via Unicode wrote:
> Hi Richard,
>
> > Not necessarily. One could allow the first strong character in the
> > prompt to determine the paragraph directions
>
> How does Emacs know what's a prompt? How can it tell it from the
> previous and
On Wed, 6 Feb 2019 22:01:59 +0100
Egmont Koblinger via Unicode wrote:
> Hi Eli,
>
> (I'm getting lost where to reply, and how the subject gets mangled and
> the thread split into different ones.)
>
>
> I've thought about it a lot, experimented with Emacs's behavior, and
> I've arrived at the
On Tue, 5 Feb 2019 16:01:41 +
Andrew West via Unicode wrote:
> You would
> have to first convert any text to be italicized to NFD, then apply
> VS14 to each non-combining character. This alone would make a VS
> solution unacceptable in my opinion.
What is so unacceptable about having to do
On Mon, 4 Feb 2019 22:27:39 +0100
Egmont Koblinger via Unicode wrote:
> Hi Richard,
>
> > The concept appears to exist in the form of the fields of the
> > fifth edition of ECMA-48. Have you digested this ambitious
> > standard?
>
> To be honest: No, I haven't. And I have no idea what those
On Tue, 5 Feb 2019 00:08:10 +0100
Egmont Koblinger via Unicode wrote:
> Hi Eli,
>
> > Actually, UAX#9 defines "paragraph" as the chunk of text delimited
> > by paragraph separator characters. This means characters whose bidi
> > category is B, which includes Newline, the CR-LF pair on Windows,
On Mon, 04 Feb 2019 22:39:07 +0200
Eli Zaretskii via Unicode wrote:
> > Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2019 19:45:13 +
> > From: Richard Wordingham via Unicode
> >
> > Yes. If one has a text composed of LTR and RTL paragraphs, one has
> > to choose how far apart their
On Sun, 3 Feb 2019 20:50:03 +
Richard Wordingham via Unicode wrote:
> On Sun, 03 Feb 2019 20:07:51 +0200
> Eli Zaretskii via Unicode wrote:
> Which is why I try to remember to issue the emacs command 'M-x shell'
> command and issue grep commands from the buffer cre
On Sun, 03 Feb 2019 18:03:37 +0200
Eli Zaretskii via Unicode wrote:
> > Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2019 03:02:13 +0100
> > Cc: unicode@unicode.org
> > From: Egmont Koblinger via Unicode
> >
> > > All I am saying is that your proposal should define what it means
> > > by visual order.
> >
> > Are
On Mon, 04 Feb 2019 18:53:22 +0200
Eli Zaretskii via Unicode wrote:
> Date: Mon, 4 Feb 2019 01:19:21 +
> From: Richard Wordingham via Unicode
>> If you look at it in Notepad, all
>> lines will be LTR or all lines will be RTL.
> That's because Notepad implements _o
On Mon, 4 Feb 2019 00:36:23 +0100
Egmont Koblinger via Unicode wrote:
> Now, back to terminals.
>
> The smallest possible viable definition of a "paragraph" in terminal
> emulators is stuff between one newline and the next one.
>
> It would require a hell lot of work, redesigning
On Mon, 4 Feb 2019 00:36:23 +0100
Egmont Koblinger via Unicode wrote:
> I wish to store and deliver the following text, as it's layed out here
> in logical order. That is, the order as the bytes appear in the text
> file, as I typed them from the keyboard, is laid out here strictly
> from left
On Sun, 03 Feb 2019 19:50:50 +0200
Eli Zaretskii via Unicode wrote:
> Do you see how this is carefully formatted to avoid overflowing an
> 80-column line of a typical terminal? Now suppose this is translated
> into a RTL language, which causes the Copyright line to start with a
> strong R
On Sun, 03 Feb 2019 18:13:06 +0200
Eli Zaretskii via Unicode wrote:
> Actually, you pass the characters to be shaped in logical order, and
> then display the produced grapheme clusters in visual order.
Some early systems supporting computerised Hebrew script did pass
characters in left-to-right
On Sun, 03 Feb 2019 20:07:51 +0200
Eli Zaretskii via Unicode wrote:
> > Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2019 17:45:06 +
> > From: Richard Wordingham via Unicode
> >
> > > > So, what do you recommend I run grep from for Hebrew or Tai
> > > > Lue?
> >
On Sun, 03 Feb 2019 18:05:49 +0200
Eli Zaretskii via Unicode wrote:
> > Date: Sat, 2 Feb 2019 21:49:40 +
> > From: Richard Wordingham via Unicode
> >
> > Eli will probably tell me I'm behind the times, but there are a few
> > places where a Gnome-terminal is b
On Sun, 03 Feb 2019 18:14:53 +0200
Eli Zaretskii via Unicode wrote:
> > Date: Sun, 3 Feb 2019 02:43:06 +
> > Cc: Kent Karlsson
> > From: Richard Wordingham via Unicode
> >
> > So, what do you recommend I run grep from for Hebrew or Tai Lue?
>
> In
On Sun, 03 Feb 2019 02:01:18 +0100
Kent Karlsson via Unicode wrote:
> Den 2019-02-02 16:12, skrev "Richard Wordingham via Unicode"
> :
> > Doesn't Jerusalem in biblical Hebrew sometime have 3 marks below the
> > lamedh? The depth then is the maximum depth, n
On Sat, 2 Feb 2019 23:02:10 +0100
Egmont Koblinger via Unicode wrote:
> Hi Richard,
>
> On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 9:57 PM Richard Wordingham
> wrote:
>
> > Seriously, you need to give a definition of 'visual order' for this
> > context. Not everyone shares your chiralist view.
>
> When I
On Sat, 2 Feb 2019 12:54:16 +0100
Egmont Koblinger via Unicode wrote:
> Hi Richard,
>
> > > Are they okay to be present in visual order (the terminal's
> > > explicit mode, what we're discussing now) too?
> >
> > Where do you define the order for explicit mode?
>
> In explicit mode, the
On Sat, 2 Feb 2019 13:18:03 +0100
Egmont Koblinger via Unicode wrote:
> Hi Richard,
>
> On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 12:43 PM Richard Wordingham via Unicode
> wrote:
>
> > I'm not conversant with the details of terminal controls and I
> > haven't used fields. However, w
On Sat, 02 Feb 2019 14:01:46 +0100
Kent Karlsson via Unicode wrote:
> Den 2019-02-02 12:17, skrev "Egmont Koblinger" :
> > Most terminal emulators handle non-spacing combining marks, it's a
> > piece of cake. (Spacing marks are more problematic.)
> Well, I guess you may need to put some
On Fri, 1 Feb 2019 15:15:53 +0100
Egmont Koblinger via Unicode wrote:
> Hi Richard,
>
> On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 at 12:19 AM Richard Wordingham via Unicode
> wrote:
>
> > Cropped why? If the problem is the truncation of lines, one can
> > simple store the next charac
On Fri, 1 Feb 2019 15:15:53 +0100
Egmont Koblinger via Unicode wrote:
> Hi Richard,
>
> On Fri, Feb 1, 2019 at 12:19 AM Richard Wordingham via Unicode
> wrote:
>
> > Cropped why? If the problem is the truncation of lines, one can
> > simple store the next charac
On Sat, 02 Feb 2019 00:38:04 +0100
Kent Karlsson via Unicode wrote:
> Den 2019-02-01 19:57, skrev "Richard Wordingham via Unicode"
> :
> "Monospaced font" is really a concept with modification. Even for
> "plain old ASCII" there are two advance widths
On Fri, 01 Feb 2019 15:18:13 -0700
Doug Ewell via Unicode wrote:
> Richard Wordingham wrote:
>
> > Language tagging is already available in Unicode, via the tag
> > characters in the deprecated plane.
>
> Plane 14 isn't deprecated -- that isn't a property of planes -- and
> the tag
On Fri, 1 Feb 2019 14:47:22 +0100
Egmont Koblinger via Unicode wrote:
> Hi Ken,
>
> > [language tag]
> > That is a complete non-starter for the Unicode Standard.
>
> Thanks for your input!
>
> (I hope it was clear that I just started throwing in random ideas, as
> in a brainstorming
On Fri, 1 Feb 2019 13:02:45 +0200
Khaled Hosny via Unicode wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 31, 2019 at 11:17:19PM +0000, Richard Wordingham via
> Unicode wrote:
> > On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 12:46:48 +0100
> > Egmont Koblinger wrote:
> >
> > No. How many cells do CJK ideograp
On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 12:46:48 +0100
Egmont Koblinger wrote:
> Hi Richard,
>
> > Basic Arabic shaping, at the level of a typewriter, is
> > straightforward enough to leave to a terminal emulator, as Eli has
> > suggested.
>
> What is "basic" Arabic shaping exactly?
Just using initial, medial
On Thu, 31 Jan 2019 08:28:41 +
Martin J. Dürst via Unicode wrote:
> > Basic Arabic shaping, at the level of a typewriter, is
> > straightforward enough to leave to a terminal emulator, as Eli has
> > suggested. Lam-alif would be trickier - one cell or two?
>
> Same for other characters.
On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 20:35:36 -0500
"Mark E. Shoulson via Unicode" wrote:
> On 1/30/19 8:58 AM, Egmont Koblinger via Unicode wrote:
> > There's another side to the entire BiDi story, though. Simple
> > utilities like "echo", "cat", "ls", "grep" and so on, line editing
> > experience of your
On Wed, 30 Jan 2019 15:33:38 +0100
Frédéric Grosshans via Unicode wrote:
> Le 30/01/2019 à 14:36, Egmont Koblinger via Unicode a écrit :
> > - It doesn't do Arabic shaping. In my recommendation I'm arguing
> > that in this mode, where shuffling the characters is the task of
> > the text editor
On Mon, 28 Jan 2019 20:55:39 -0500
"Mark E. Shoulson via Unicode" wrote:
> On 1/28/19 2:31 AM, Mark Davis ☕️ via Unicode wrote:
> >
> > But the question is how important those are in daily life. I'm not
> > sure why the double-click selection behavior is so much more of a
> > problem for
On Mon, 28 Jan 2019 21:10:19 -0500
"Mark E. Shoulson via Unicode" wrote:
> On 1/28/19 3:58 PM, Richard Wordingham via Unicode wrote:
> > Interestingly, bringing this word breaker into line with TUS in the
> > UK may well be in breach of the Equality Act 2010.
> >
&
On Mon, 28 Jan 2019 08:31:40 +0100
Mark Davis ☕️ via Unicode wrote:
> But the question is how important those are in daily life. I'm not
> sure why the double-click selection behavior is so much more of a
> problem for Ancient Greek users than it is for the somewhat larger
> community of English
On Mon, 28 Jan 2019 03:48:52 +
James Kass via Unicode wrote:
> It’s been said that the text segmentation rules seem over-complicated
> and are probably non-trivial to implement properly. I tried your
> suggestion of WORD JOINER U+2060 after tau ( γένοιτ’ ἄν ), but it
> only added yet
On Sun, 27 Jan 2019 19:57:37 +
James Kass via Unicode wrote:
> On 2019-01-27 7:09 PM, James Tauber via Unicode wrote:
> > In my original post, I asked if a language-specific tailoring of
> > the text segmentation algorithm was the solution but no one here
> > has agreed so far.
> If there
On Sun, 27 Jan 2019 14:09:31 -0500
James Tauber via Unicode wrote:
> On Sun, Jan 27, 2019 at 1:22 PM Richard Wordingham via Unicode <
> unicode@unicode.org> wrote:
> > However LibreOffice treats "don't" as a single word for U+0027,
> > U+02BC and U+2019,
On Sun, 27 Jan 2019 16:11:12 +
Michael Everson via Unicode wrote:
> Yes, yes. It doesn’t matter. The discussion applies to both the two
> quotation marks and the two modifier letters.
Actually, there is a difference. As the ʻokina doesnʹt occur at the
end of a word in Hawaiian, one only
On Sun, 27 Jan 2019 12:38:39 -0500
"Mark E. Shoulson via Unicode" wrote:
> On 1/27/19 11:08 AM, Michael Everson via Unicode wrote:
> > It is a letter. In “can’t” the apostrophe isn’t a letter. It’s a
> > mark of elision. I can double-click on the three words in this
> > paragraph which have the
On Sat, 26 Jan 2019 21:11:36 -0800
Asmus Freytag via Unicode wrote:
> On 1/26/2019 5:43 PM, Richard Wordingham via Unicode wrote:
>> That appears to contradict Michael Everson's remark about a
>> Polynesian
>> need to distinguish the two visually.
> Why do you need to d
On Sun, 27 Jan 2019 01:55:29 +
James Kass via Unicode wrote:
> Richard Wordingham replied to Asmus Freytag,
>
> >> To make matters worse, users for languages that "should" use
> >> U+02BC aren't actually consistent; much data uses U+2019 or
> >> U+0027. Ordinary users can't tell the
On Sat, 26 Jan 2019 17:11:49 -0800
Asmus Freytag via Unicode wrote:
> To make matters worse, users for languages that "should" use U+02BC
> aren't actually consistent; much data uses U+2019 or U+0027. Ordinary
> users can't tell the difference (and spell checkers seem not
> successful in
On Sun, 27 Jan 2019 00:32:43 +
Michael Everson via Unicode wrote:
> I’ll be publishing a translation of Alice into Ancient Greek in due
> course. I will absolutely only use U+2019 for the apostrophe. It
> would be wrong for lots of reasons to use U+02BC for this.
Please list them.
Will
On Sat, 26 Jan 2019 15:45:54 +
James Kass via Unicode wrote:
> Perhaps I'm not understanding, but if the desired behavior is to
> prohibit both line and word breaks in the example string, then...
>
> In Notepad, replacing U+0020 with U+00A0 removes the line-break.
I believe the problem is
On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 17:02:25 -0500
James Tauber via Unicode wrote:
> I guess U+02BC is category Lm not Mn, but doesn't that still mean it
> modifies the previous character (i.e. is really part of the same
> grapheme cluster) and so isn't appropriate as either a vowel or an
> indication of an
On Fri, 25 Jan 2019 12:39:47 -0500
James Tauber via Unicode wrote:
> Thank you, although the word break does still affect things like
> double-clicking to select.
>
> And people do seem to want to use U+02BC for this reason (and I'm
> trying to articulate why that isn't what U+02BC is meant
On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 18:24:07 +0200
Khaled Hosny via Unicode wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 24, 2019 at 03:54:29PM +, Andrew West via Unicode
> wrote:
>> On Thu, 24 Jan 2019 at 15:42, James Kass
>> wrote:
>>> Going off topic a little, I saw this tweet from Marijn van Putten
>>> today which shows
On Mon, 21 Jan 2019 00:29:42 -0800
David Starner via Unicode wrote:
> The superscripts show a problem with multiple encoding; even if you
> think they should be Unicode superscripts, and they look like Unicode
> superscripts, they might be HTML superscripts. Same thing would happen
> with
On Sun, 20 Jan 2019 03:14:21 +
James Kass via Unicode wrote:
> (In the event that a persuasive proposal presentation prompts the
> possibility of italics encoding...)
The use of italic script isn't just restricted to the Latin script,
which includes base characters not supported by the
On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 10:51:18 -0500
"Mark E. Shoulson via Unicode" wrote:
> On 1/16/19 6:23 AM, Victor Gaultney via Unicode wrote:
> >
> > Encoding 'begin italic' and 'end italic' would introduce
> > difficulties when partial strings are moved, etc. But that's no
> > different than with current
On Fri, 18 Jan 2019 10:20:22 -0800
Asmus Freytag via Unicode wrote:
> However, if there's a consensus interpretation of a given character
> the you can't just go in and change it, even if it would make that
> character work "better" for a given circumstance: you simply don't
> know (unless you
On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 18:44:50 -0500
"J. S. Choi" via Unicode wrote:
> I’m implementing a Unicode names library. I’m confused about loose
> character-name matching, even after rereading The Unicode Standard §
> 4.8, UAX #34 § 4, #44 § 5.9.2 – as well as
>
On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 18:35:49 +0100
Marcel Schneider via Unicode wrote:
> Among the grievances, Unicode is blamed for confusing Greek psili and
> dasia with comma shapes, and for misinterpreting Latin letter forms
> such as the u with descender taken for a turned h, and double u
> mistaken for a
On Thu, 17 Jan 2019 04:51:57 +0100
Marcel Schneider via Unicode wrote:
> Also, at least one French typographer was extremely upset
> about Unicode not gathering feedback from typographers.
> That blame is partly wrong since at least one typographer
> was and still is present in WG2, and even if
On Tue, 15 Jan 2019 13:25:06 +0100
Philippe Verdy via Unicode wrote:
> If your fonts behave incorrectly on your system because it does not
> map any glyph for NNBSP, don't blame the font or Unicode about this
> problem, blame the renderer (or the application or OS using it, may
> be they are
On Mon, 14 Jan 2019 16:02:05 -0800
Asmus Freytag via Unicode wrote:
> On 1/14/2019 3:37 PM, Richard Wordingham via Unicode wrote:
> On Tue, 15 Jan 2019 00:02:49 +0100
> Hans Åberg via Unicode wrote:
>
> On 14 Jan 2019, at 23:43, James Kass via Unicode
> wrote:
>
On Mon, 14 Jan 2019 06:24:46 +
James Kass via Unicode wrote:
> Unicode doesn't enforce any spelling or punctuation rules. Unicode
> doesn't tell human beings how to pronounce strings of text or how to
> interpret them.
These are not statements that are both honest and true. Unicode lays
On Tue, 15 Jan 2019 00:02:49 +0100
Hans Åberg via Unicode wrote:
> > On 14 Jan 2019, at 23:43, James Kass via Unicode
> > wrote:
> >
> > Hans Åberg wrote,
> >
> > > How about using U+0301 COMBINING ACUTE ACCENT: 푝푎푠푠푒́
> >
> > Thought about using a combining accent. Figured it would
On Mon, 14 Jan 2019 07:47:45 + (GMT)
Julian Bradfield via Unicode wrote:
> On 2019-01-13, James Kass via Unicode wrote:
> > यदि आप किसी रोटरी फोन से कॉल कर रहे हैं, तो कृपया स्टार (*) दबाएं।
>
> > What happens with Devanagari text? Should the user community
> > refrain from
On Sat, 12 Jan 2019 14:21:19 +
James Kass via Unicode wrote:
> FWIW, the math formula:
> a + b # 푏 + 푎
> ... becomes invalid if normalized NFKD/NFKC. (Or if copy/pasted from
> an HTML page using marked-up ASCII into a plain-text editor.)
(a) Italic versus plain is not significant in the
On Thu, 10 Jan 2019 23:43:46 +
James Kass via Unicode wrote:
> The second step would be to persuade Unicode to encode a new
> character rather than simply using an existing variation selector
> character to do the job.
Actually, this might be a superior option.
Richard.
On Sat, 3 Nov 2018 22:55:17 +0100
Philippe Verdy via Unicode wrote:
> I can also cite the case of Egyptian hieroglyphs: there's still no
> way to render them correctly because we lack the development of a
> stable orthography that would drive the encoding of the missing
> **semantic** characters
On Fri, 2 Nov 2018 14:27:37 -0700
Ken Whistler via Unicode wrote:
> On 11/2/2018 10:02 AM, Philippe Verdy via Unicode wrote:
> > UTR#10 still does not explicitly state that its use of "" does
> > not mean it is a valid "weight", it's a notation only
>
> No, it is explicitly a valid
On Thu, 1 Nov 2018 07:46:40 +
Richard Wordingham via Unicode wrote:
> On Wed, 31 Oct 2018 23:35:06 +0100
> Piotr Karocki via Unicode wrote:
>
> > These are only examples of changes in meaning with or ,
> > not all of these examples can really exist - but, then, anot
On Fri, 02 Nov 2018 08:38:45 -0700
Doug Ewell via Unicode wrote:
> Do we have any other evidence of this usage, besides a single
> handwritten postcard?
What, beyond some of us actually employing it ourselves? I'm sure I've
seen 'William' abbreviated in print to 'Wᵐ' with some mark below, but
On Fri, 2 Nov 2018 14:54:19 +0100
Philippe Verdy via Unicode wrote:
> It's not just a question of "I like it or not". But the fact that the
> standard makes the presence of required in some steps, and the
> requirement is in fact wrong: this is in fact NEVER required to
> create an
On Thu, 01 Nov 2018 18:23:05 +0100
"Janusz S. Bień via Unicode" wrote:
> On Thu, Nov 01 2018 at 8:43 -0700, Asmus Freytag via Unicode wrote:
> > I don't think it's a joke to recognize that there is a continuum
> > here and that there is no line that can be drawn which is based on
> >
On Thu, 1 Nov 2018 18:39:16 +0100
Philippe Verdy via Unicode wrote:
> What this means is that we can safely implement UCA using basic
> substitions (e.g. with a function like "string:gsub(map)" in Lua
> which uses a "map" to map source (binary) strings or regexps,into
> target (binary) strings:
On Thu, 1 Nov 2018 21:13:46 +0100
Philippe Verdy via Unicode wrote:
> I'm not speaking just about how collation keys will finally be stored
> (as uint16 or bytes, or sequences of bits with variable length); I'm
> just refering to the sequence of weights you generate.
> You absolutely NEVER
101 - 200 of 428 matches
Mail list logo
