Kenneth Whistler wrote:
Uh, no. is equivalent to .
I suspect that "equivalent" is only for some aspects.
In particular, NBSP has a bidi category of CS, which means that "A
07 B" (in bidi notation) displays as "B 0 7 A", while "A 07 B" displays as "B 7 0 A".
Eric.
Peter Kirk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> write:
But the good screen reader would still need to distinguish their
pronunciations. Is there any type of character which could be defined,
in Unicode, to preserve this distinction, but to be completely hidden in
> display? Perhaps some kind of zero width mo
On 03/04/2004 13:24, D. Starner wrote:
Peter Kirk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> write:
But the good screen reader would still need to distinguish their
pronunciations. Is there any type of character which could be defined,
in Unicode, to preserve this distinction, but to be completely hidden in
d
Peter Kirk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> write:
But the good screen reader would still need to distinguish their
pronunciations. Is there any type of character which could be defined,
in Unicode, to preserve this distinction, but to be completely hidden in
display? Perhaps some kind of zero width mor
On 02/04/2004 15:01, Asmus Freytag wrote:
...
Think of the example of SHY (soft hyphen), used to mark possible
hyphenation
points in a word. A while ago we had a discussion on this list where
there was
an interesting minimal pair of German compounds:
Wachs|tu-be (tube of (or made of) wax)
Wac
2004-04-03T02:34:38+03:00 D. Starner <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>> > It only affects its (visual) aesthetic
>> > quality.
>>
>> That is arguable. An aural user agent could pronounce "1, 2, 3" a bit
>> different from "1, 2, 3" if there is a (say) thin space between the
>> digits in the latter c
> Alexander Savenkov suggested:
>> Why not? I think Peter needs a good book on typesetting to find out
>> what is inserted inserted between "Louis" and "XIV". In this case IIRC
>> there should be the following sequence: Louis,ZWNBSP,SP,ZWNBSP,XIV.
Kenneth Whistler replied:
> Uh, no. is equivale
Somebody wrote:
> non-breaking and non-stretching are presentational properties, not
> semantic ones. They don't change the meaning of the space: it's still
> just a space, not a hyphen or the letter "g". They don't affect
> non-visual media; we don't break lines in spoken speech. "Louis XVI"
> is
> > It only affects its (visual) aesthetic
> > quality.
>
> That is arguable. An aural user agent could pronounce "1, 2, 3" a bit
> different from "1, 2, 3" if there is a (say) thin space between the
> digits in the latter case. It could pronounce it quicker, for example.
And it could read
Alexander Savenkov suggested:
> Why not? I think Peter needs a good book on typesetting to find out
> what is inserted inserted between "Louis" and "XIV". In this case IIRC
> there should be the following sequence: Louis,ZWNBSP,SP,ZWNBSP,XIV.
Uh, no. is equivalent to . In either
case, the SPACE
Hello,
sorry for the late response.
2004-04-01T03:47:40+03:00 Kenneth Whistler <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Other possible approaches that any industrial-strength
> typesetting program ought to provide:
...
> The point is that looking to encode a special character in
> Unicode for every distin
Hello,
and sorry for the late response.
2004-04-01T05:41:02+03:00 fantasai <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
But, as Ken has just clarified, with NBSP Louis' neck may be
stretched rather uncomfortably, if not cut completely. Here is what I
don't want to see (fixed width font required):
>
Arcane Jill wrote:
> 0x80 if I remember correctly.
I know you've already corrected yourself, realizing that you were
thinking of the extended-ASCII character set used by the ZX Spectrum (TS
2068, IIRC), but just to finish this thought:
> There were sixteen block-graphics characters, remember? Th
Arcane Jill wrote:
> There were sixteen block-graphics characters, remember?
> They each were subdivided into four quadrants, each of
> which could be either black or white, according to the
> low order four bits of the codepoint. The all-white
> block-graphics character was visually indistinguisha
OK, I was wrong about the ZX80 character set. Seems I was actually
thinking about the ZX Spectrum. Ahem. It's character set is listed
here:
http://www.madhippy.com/8-bit/sinclair/zxspecman/zxmanappa.html
Note the distinction between character 0x20 and character 0x80.
Arcane Jill
On 01/04/2004 22:55, Doug Ewell wrote:
...And maybe it's just my lack of creative thinking, but I certainly can't
imagine a proportional font on a ZX80 or ZX81 -- not on that blocky
24-line screen!
Stretching of spaces does not depend on having a proportional font. On
modern systems spaces are
age-
> From: Doug Ewell [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Sent: Friday, April 02, 2004 7:55 AM
> To: Unicode Mailing List
> Cc: Arcane Jill
> Subject: Re: Fixed Width Spaces (was: Printing and
Displaying
> DependentVowels)
>
>
> Which character was that? I thought the
Arcane Jill wrote:
> Of course, back in the days of the ZX80 (a device which, by the way,
> had its own custom, non-ASCII character set) and its offshoots, there
> was indeed a SPACE LETTER - a character which looked like a space,
> but acted like a letter, so "Louis XVI" could be made to count as
At 12:48 -0800 2004-03-31, Kenneth Whistler wrote:
There is *NO* UTC decision on record to make the NBSP be a fixed-width
space, in the history of its decision making.
Nor should there be. NBSP is the same as SPACE except for the fact
that it doesn't break at a line. It should be just as squishab
> In HTML, one might specify
> to generate a fixed-width space.
IMHO, if the can be expanded by the justification,
this construction will not work,
only it will restrict the width of the space
to integer multiples of the fixed character width.
P.A.
Quoting Peter Kirk <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Can you draft a quick proposal to add these characters in time to submit
> it today? Otherwise this kind of proposal might have to wait a whole year.
Alas, I have work to do. My proposal today to the IETF languages list had to
wait a year because illness
> Gosh, that brings me back. All those characters that were BASIC keywords
> compressed into one octet. How could we have neglected to encode such important
> legacy characters, this unnecessarily complicates round-trip conversion between
> ZX80s and Unicode.
Indeed. http://www.howell1964.freeserv
From: Arcane Jill
> Of course, back in the days of the ZX80 (a device which, by the way, had
> its own custom, non-ASCII character set) and its offshoots, there was
> indeed a SPACE LETTER - a character which looked like a space, but
> acted like a letter, so "Louis XVI" could be made to count
On 01/04/2004 05:35, Jon Hanna wrote:
Quoting Arcane Jill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
Of course, back in the days of the ZX80 (a device which, by the way, had
its own custom, non-ASCII character set) and its offshoots, there was
indeed a SPACE LETTER - a character which /looked/ like a space, but
Quoting Arcane Jill <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
> Of course, back in the days of the ZX80 (a device which, by the way, had
> its own custom, non-ASCII character set) and its offshoots, there was
> indeed a SPACE LETTER - a character which /looked/ like a space, but
> /acted/ like a letter,
Gosh, that
- Original Message -
From: "Séamas Ó Brógáin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: "Unicode-L" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2004 1:24 PM
Subject: Re: Fixed Width Spaces (was: Printing and Displaying DependentVowels)
> Philippe Verdy wrote:
>
&
de is another matter
entirely, but it sounds good to me, so I'll raise it for discussion.
Phillippe's idea does have precedent.
Arcane Jill
> -Original Message-
> From: Philippe Verdy [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]]
> Sent: Thursday, April 01, 2004 10:52 AM
> Subject: Re: Fixed
On 01/04/2004 01:52, Philippe Verdy wrote:
From: "Peter Kirk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
I disagree. Surely there is something SEMANTICALLY different about the
space in "Louis XVI". One semantic difference is that it is
non-breaking. But another one is that these words should not be split
apart. An ad
Philippe Verdy wrote:
Don't exagerate here: an author may wish to emphasize a semantic with
a visual grouping of some related words, but this is left as a author
decision i.e. part of the style he wishes to apply.
An author "may" wish to do so, but in practice they don't. And if they
did, their
From: "Séamas Ó Brógáin" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Peter Kirk wrote:
>
> > But, as Ken has just clarified, with NBSP Louis' neck may be stretched
> > rather uncomfortably, if not cut completely. Here is what I don't want
> > to see (fixed width font required):
> >
> > Louis XVI was
> > guillotined
Peter Kirk wrote:
But, as Ken has just clarified, with NBSP Louis' neck may be stretched
rather uncomfortably, if not cut completely. Here is what I don't want
to see (fixed width font required):
Louis XVI was
guillotinedin
1793.
Here is what I do want:
Louis XVI was
guillotined
From: "Peter Kirk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I disagree. Surely there is something SEMANTICALLY different about the
> space in "Louis XVI". One semantic difference is that it is
> non-breaking. But another one is that these words should not be split
> apart. An additional semantic distinction might be
Peter Kirk wrote:
On 31/03/2004 14:25, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Peter Kirk scripsit:
But, as Ken has just clarified, with NBSP Louis' neck may be
stretched rather uncomfortably, if not cut completely. Here is what I
don't want to see (fixed width font required):
Louis XVI was
guillotined
> > Here is what I do want:
> >
> > Louis XVI was
> > guillotinedin
> > 1793.
>
> Louis\ XVI was guillotined in 1793. If you aren't using TeX,
> and you're doing this type of justification in small columns,
> your program ought to provide a way to do this.
Other possible appro
On 31/03/2004 14:25, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
Peter Kirk scripsit:
But, as Ken has just clarified, with NBSP Louis' neck may be stretched
rather uncomfortably, if not cut completely. Here is what I don't want
to see (fixed width font required):
Louis XVI was
guillotinedin
1793.
Peter Kirk wrote:
Louis XVI was
guillotinedin
1793.
Here is what I do want:
Louis XVI was
guillotinedin
1793.
Louis\ XVI was guillotined in 1793. If you aren't using TeX,
and you're doing this type of justification in small columns,
your program ought to provide a way
Peter Kirk scripsit:
> But, as Ken has just clarified, with NBSP Louis' neck may be stretched
> rather uncomfortably, if not cut completely. Here is what I don't want
> to see (fixed width font required):
>
> Louis XVI was
> guillotinedin
> 1793.
This, however, is a matter of presentat
- see
ISO 8859.
Jony
> -Original Message-
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf Of Peter Kirk
> Sent: Wednesday, March 31, 2004 10:13 PM
> To: Kenneth Whistler
> Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
> Subject: Re: Fixed Width Spaces (was: Printing and Dis
On 31/03/2004 12:27, fantasai wrote:
Peter Kirk wrote:
LouisXVI may have lost his head, but we don't
want his number also to fall off on to the next line, or even to
become too far separated from his name. We need to know what kind of
space to use to resist the guillotine!
NBSP
You should n
Peter continued:
> Thanks for the clarification. I should say that the behaviour of NBSP
> suddenly reverted to what it had been in previous versions of the
> standard, although a perhaps inadvertant change was made in 4.0.0.
Even that is not correct.
The *Introduction* to UAX #14 was expanded
On 31/03/2004 11:57, Kenneth Whistler wrote:
... To most people, a space is a space. To rather more, there
is a second kind of space which they expect to be non-breaking and often
also expect to be fixed width. (Those who had the latter expectation
have had a nasty surprise today because with t
Peter Kirk wrote:
LouisXVI may have lost his head, but we don't want
his number also to fall off on to the next line, or even to become too
far separated from his name. We need to know what kind of space to use
to resist the guillotine!
NBSP
You should not rely on fixed-width spaces to approxim
Language Analysis Systems, Inc. Unicode list reader scripsit:
> It sorta seems like the need to keep phrases like "Louis XIV" together
> is a valid one the deserves a solution, but it also seems fairly
> esoteric-- typesetters and people who give a lot of thought to the
> presentation of their tex
On 31/03/2004 08:49, Language Analysis Systems, Inc. Unicode list reader
wrote:
So perhaps the best thing to do in cases like Ernest's and mine, where
a
fixed width non-breaking space is required, is to use FIGURE SPACE,
which I understand is non-breaking. But then perhaps this is too w
>So perhaps the best thing to do in cases like Ernest's and mine, where
a
>fixed width non-breaking space is required, is to use FIGURE SPACE,
>which I understand is non-breaking. But then perhaps this is too wide
in
>some circumstances - in many fonts it is twice the regular width of
SPACE.
Go
On 30/03/2004 18:01, fantasai wrote:
Ernest Cline wrote:
The main usage is with compound words such as "ice cream" or
"Louis XIV" or commercial phrases such as "Camry SE" where for
esthetic reasons an author would prefer that the space not expand
upon justification,
Given wide enough measures,
On Tuesday, March 30, 2004 11:42 PM, Ernest Cline va escriure:
> The main usage is with compound words such as "ice cream" or
> "Louis XIV" or commercial phrases such as "Camry SE" where for
> esthetic reasons an author would prefer that the space not expand
> upon justification,
Well, as one tha
Ernest Cline wrote:
The main usage is with compound words such as "ice cream" or
"Louis XIV" or commercial phrases such as "Camry SE" where for
esthetic reasons an author would prefer that the space not expand
upon justification,
Given wide enough measures, good text layout program should be able
t
> [Original Message]
> From: Asmus Freytag <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> At 10:12 AM 3/30/2004, Ernest Cline wrote:
>
>
>
> > > [Original Message]
> > > From: Asmus Freytag <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > >
> > > At 12:19 PM 3/29/2004, Ernest Cline wrote:
> > >
> > > >
> > > > UAX #14 makes a rather definitiv
49 matches
Mail list logo
