Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 2:15 AM, Kent Karlsson wrote: > > Den 2017-04-12 05:14, skrev "Garth Wallace" : > > One salient feature the Block Elements have that the Box Drawing > characters do not: distinct LEFT and RIGHT verticals, and LOWER and UPPER >

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

2017-04-12 15:48 GMT+02:00 Julian Bradfield via Unicode : > On 2017-04-12, Philippe Verdy via Unicode wrote: > > 2017-04-12 8:35 GMT+02:00 Martin J. Dürst : > >> On Go boards, the grid cells are definitely rectangular, not

Re: Xiangqi Game Symbols (was Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation)

On 12 April 2017 at 15:58, Garth Wallace wrote: > > So has that proposal been retracted now? Once a proposal has been approved it cannot simply be retracted by the submitter. On the SC2 side, the proposed characters have been subject to ballot comments from national bodies, and

Re: Xiangqi Game Symbols (was Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation)

On Wed, Apr 12, 2017 at 2:13 AM Andrew West wrote: > On 12 April 2017 at 05:12, Garth Wallace via Unicode > wrote: > > > > Later Xiangqi proposals by Andrew West focused on > > the circled ideographs and did not pursue new diagram drawing characters,

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On 2017-04-12, Philippe Verdy via Unicode wrote: > 2017-04-12 8:35 GMT+02:00 Martin J. Dürst : >> On Go boards, the grid cells are definitely rectangular, not square. The >> reason for this is that boards are usually looked at at an angle, and >>

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

2017-04-12 8:35 GMT+02:00 Martin J. Dürst : > On 2017/04/12 00:44, Philippe Verdy via Unicode wrote: > > Some Asian chess boards include also diagonal lines or dots on top of their >> crossing (notably 9x9 boards are subdivided into nine 3x3 subgroups by >> such >> dots).

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On 12 Apr 2017, at 10:16, Kent Karlsson via Unicode wrote: > Unicode has (only) these for Shogi pieces: > > 2616;WHITE SHOGI PIECE;So;0;ON;N; > 2617;BLACK SHOGI PIECE;So;0;ON;N; > 26C9;TURNED WHITE SHOGI PIECE;So;0;ON;N; > 26CA;TURNED BLACK SHOGI

Re: Xiangqi Game Symbols (was Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation)

On 12 Apr 2017, at 10:13, Andrew West via Unicode wrote: > My Xiangqi proposal (http://www.unicode.org/L2/L2016/16255-n4748-xiangqi.pdf) > proposed a minimal set of logical game pieces for Xiangqi/Janggi, regardless > of shape (circular or octagonal) or design (traditional

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

Den 2017-04-12 06:12, skrev "Garth Wallace" : > Shogi diagrams are uncheckered (as Shogi boards are), with grid-lines to > separate the spaces; traditionally, chess diagrams use the contrast of dark > and light squares to distinguish spaces with no grid lines. They may, but do

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

Den 2017-04-12 05:14, skrev "Garth Wallace" : > One salient feature the Block Elements have that the Box Drawing characters do > not: distinct LEFT and RIGHT verticals, and LOWER and UPPER horizontals. The > double frame typically consists of a thin line and a thicker line,

Xiangqi Game Symbols (was Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation)

On 12 April 2017 at 05:12, Garth Wallace via Unicode wrote: > > Later Xiangqi proposals by Andrew West focused on > the circled ideographs and did not pursue new diagram drawing characters, > and were eventually successful. My Xiangqi proposal

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On Wed, 12 Apr 2017 06:58:22 +0200 Philippe Verdy via Unicode wrote: > This is the same problem. The same problem as crossword grids where > we need also empty cells (and "black" cells which are equivalent to > an empty cell with a black square symbol instead of letters).

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On 2017/04/12 00:44, Philippe Verdy via Unicode wrote: Some Asian chess boards include also diagonal lines or dots on top of their crossing (notably 9x9 boards are subdivided into nine 3x3 subgroups by such dots). These chess boards do not alternate white and black "squares" ; beside this, the

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

2017-04-12 6:12 GMT+02:00 Garth Wallace : > On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 8:44 AM, Philippe Verdy via Unicode < > unicode@unicode.org> wrote: > >> >> >> 2017-04-11 15:04 GMT+02:00 Kent Karlsson via Unicode > >: >> >>> >>> Den 2017-04-10 12:19, skrev "Michael

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 8:44 AM, Philippe Verdy via Unicode < unicode@unicode.org> wrote: > > > 2017-04-11 15:04 GMT+02:00 Kent Karlsson via Unicode > : > >> >> Den 2017-04-10 12:19, skrev "Michael Everson" : >> >> > I believe the box drawing characters

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 6:04 AM, Kent Karlsson via Unicode < unicode@unicode.org> wrote: > > Den 2017-04-10 12:19, skrev "Michael Everson" : > > > I donšt want to get mixed up in using the box-drawing > > characters. The characters which I have chosen work fine and to my

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

2017-04-11 15:04 GMT+02:00 Kent Karlsson via Unicode : > > Den 2017-04-10 12:19, skrev "Michael Everson" : > > > I believe the box drawing characters are for drawing boxes > > Which is exactly what you are doing. > > > and grids on > > computer

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On Saturday 8 April 2017 I wrote: > I have made an OpenType font that implements Michael's proposed format and > the extension of having variation selectors for the border units that Michael > kindly added during the discussion. > I have published the font and the font is available, free, from

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

Den 2017-04-10 12:19, skrev "Michael Everson" : > I believe the box drawing characters are for drawing boxes Which is exactly what you are doing. > and grids on > computer terminals, which is not the same thing as scoring a line around a set > of 64 graphic images. No,

RE: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

Subject: Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation On 4/8/2017 12:20 PM, Michael Everson wrote: I can quote your own message just posted 3 hours ago? YOU REALLY USED the term "game" and wanted developers to use fonts for them. Please learn to read. Time for

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On 10 Apr 2017, at 11:40, Christoph Päper wrote: > Even if I were [wrong], nobody has proven that. Everybody is just shouting > out their presumptions and prejudices, full of falsehoods. I have stated that emoji is a different world. It brings with it specific

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

Michael Everson : > On 7 Apr 2017, at 23:17, Christoph Päper wrote: > > >> The only connection this has with emoji is that it uses the variation > >> selector system. > > > > As I've shown, that's not the *only* connection. > > Christoph, YOU

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On 10 Apr 2017, at 09:49, Christoph Päper wrote: > If Unicode chess diagrams used VS-16 instead of VS-1 and VS-2, users could > one day choose a font that fakes marble, wood, glass, steel or just some > random color or even animation for pieces and board squares.

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

Kent, I believe the box drawing characters are for drawing boxes and grids on computer terminals, which is not the same thing as scoring a line around a set of 64 graphic images. I don’t want to get mixed up in using the box-drawing characters. The characters which I have chosen work fine and

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

Den 2017-04-06 01:25, skrev "Michael Everson" : > Oh, here. This is what I would add. > > 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

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On 8 Apr 2017, at 22:23, Asmus Freytag wrote: > Time for Sarasvati to pull the plug on this thread? Useful input has been gratefully received. I thank those gave it. Michael Everson

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On 4/8/2017 12:20 PM, Michael Everson wrote: I can quote your own message just posted 3 hours ago? YOU REALLY USED the term "game" and wanted developers to use fonts for them. Please learn to read. Time for Sarasvati to pull the

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

> On 8 Apr 2017, at 15:14, Philippe Verdy wrote: > > 2017-04-08 15:59 GMT+02:00 Michael Everson : > >> We’re not proposing to “implement a game”. > > > > You were yourself speaking about applications, me too, not just a "game". > > No, I wasn’t. > > I

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On Thu, 06 Apr 2017 18:26:39 +0200 Kent Karlsson wrote: > All the characters in the "chess board lines" (apart from spaces, if > any), are of bidi category ON or NSM. So there is no character that > "sets" a bidi direction of the lines ("paragraphs"). So if the bidi >

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On Thu, 6 Apr 2017 11:08:43 +0200 (CEST) Christoph Päper wrote: > Richard Wordingham : > > If the variation selectors are ignored, these simplify to: > > > > white square > > hatched square > > specific piece > > > > This preserves

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On Wed, 5 Apr 2017 20:32:44 +0100 Michael Everson wrote: > On 5 Apr 2017, at 20:13, Philippe Verdy wrote: > Chess characters aren’t emojis. That doesn't mean that solutions applicable to emojis might not be applicable elsewhere. > The logic of the

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

I have made an OpenType font that implements Michael's proposed format and the extension of having variation selectors for the border units that Michael kindly added during the discussion. I have published the font and the font is available, free, from the following forum thread.

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

2017-04-08 15:59 GMT+02:00 Michael Everson : > >> We’re not proposing to “implement a game”. > > > > You were yourself speaking about applications, me too, not just a "game". > > No, I wasn’t. I can quote your own message just posted 3 hours ago? YOU REALLY USED the term

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On 8 Apr 2017, at 14:50, Philippe Verdy wrote: >>> May be they use fonts, >> >> There is no maybe about it. > > There REALLY IS a "maybe", because this is not required at all, and most > chess applications do not use any "font" (most of them display bitmap icons, > or

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On Wed, 5 Apr 2017 14:08:03 +0100 Michael Everson wrote: > 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

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

2017-04-08 14:10 GMT+02:00 Michael Everson : > On 8 Apr 2017, at 13:01, Philippe Verdy wrote: > > > (They ARE using fonts, which shows they want to do this in text. They > are NOT using UCS characters, and they do NOT have a coherent model amongst > any

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On 8 Apr 2017, at 13:01, Philippe Verdy wrote: > (They ARE using fonts, which shows they want to do this in text. They are NOT > using UCS characters, and they do NOT have a coherent model amongst any of > their hacks.) > > May be they use fonts, There is no maybe about

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

2017-04-08 13:10 GMT+02:00 Michael Everson : > On 8 Apr 2017, at 02:02, Asmus Freytag wrote: > > >> This isn’t about game play. > > > > Why rule this out? Once you have a plain text solution, you'll enable > any plain text platform. > > > > Seems

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On 8 Apr 2017, at 02:02, Asmus Freytag wrote: >> This isn’t about game play. > > Why rule this out? Once you have a plain text solution, you'll enable any > plain text platform. > > Seems almost churlish to want to limit what you can do...in what would be > after the

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On 4/7/2017 4:33 PM, Michael Everson wrote: On 8 Apr 2017, at 00:28, Rebecca T <637...@gmail.com> wrote: while evidently there are users who need to send BROCCOLI to one another, nobody but nobody needs to send an 8 x 8 chessboard matrix in a tweet. Get it? I simply must disagree; sending a

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On 8 Apr 2017, at 00:28, Rebecca T <637...@gmail.com> wrote: > > while evidently there are users who need to send BROCCOLI to one another, > > nobody but nobody needs to send an 8 x 8 chessboard matrix in a tweet. Get > > it? > > I simply must disagree; sending a textual chessboard sounds

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

> while evidently there are users who need to send BROCCOLI to one another, > nobody but nobody needs to send an 8 x 8 chessboard matrix in a tweet. Get > it? I simply must disagree; sending a textual chessboard sounds awesome! A twitter bot that plays chess with you and shows you a graphical

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On 6 Apr 2017, at 18:43, Philippe Verdy wrote: >> It’s an argument for legibility. > > And an argument for rendering purpose only; Why? Shouldn’t human beings be able to read things that are rendered? > the actual 2D layout of chess diagrams is not part of Unicode The

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On 7 Apr 2017, at 23:17, Christoph Päper wrote: >> The only connection this has with emoji is that it uses the variation >> selector system. > > As I've shown, that's not the *only* connection. Christoph, YOU ARE WRONG. Emoji as a special relationship with

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

Garth Wallace : > On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 5:19 AM, Christoph Päper > wrote: > > > Although Michael Everson readily dismisses any connection to emojis, (...) > > normal emoji design actually matches "diagram" notation quite nicely in > > that all >

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

2017-04-06 18:26 GMT+02:00 Kent Karlsson : > > Den 2017-04-06 03:05, skrev "Michael Everson" : > > > On 6 Apr 2017, at 01:54, Kent Karlsson > wrote: > > > - some bidi fix [preferably making the box/border drawing

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 5:19 AM, Christoph Päper wrote: > Mark Davis ☕️ : > > > > I'm looking forward to similar postings on checkers and go pieces. (...) > > And I'm looking also forward to the ♖+ZWJ+⬛️ (etc) proposal. > > Well, actually ... > >

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

2017-04-06 14:57 GMT+02:00 Michael Everson : > On 6 Apr 2017, at 11:00, Christoph Päper > wrote: > > > > Michael Everson : > >> > >> Standardized variation sequences are the best way to achieve this > simply and without

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On 6 Apr 2017, at 17:24, Kent Karlsson wrote: > One in one single font (according to your current proposal), one can only > have EITHER terminal emulator version, OR chess border version. Not both. > Using variant selectors for the chess border variants allow for

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

Den 2017-04-06 03:05, skrev "Michael Everson" : > 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

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

Den 2017-04-06 03:08, skrev "Michael Everson" : > 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

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

Michael Everson wrote: > Leaving out the de-facto flag of Northern Ireland wasn’t very wise > either, Nor over a thousand flags of regions that don't happen to compete independently in international sports. But anyway. -- Doug Ewell | Thornton, CO, US | ewellic.org

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

Here is a link to a chess-type board in a garden in France shown in Google Street View. https://www.google.co.uk/maps/@47.1030089,0.3209105,3a,75y,24.39h,75.31t/data=!3m6!1e1!3m4!1sb0b73sCdjBaGofBYjXOy8Q!2e0!7i13312!8i6656 One can move around the board within Google Street View. How could we

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On 6 Apr 2017, at 13:19, Christoph Päper wrote: > > Although Michael Everson readily dismisses any connection to emojis, e.g. > L2/16-021 or L2/16-087+088, and hence the Emoji and Emoji_Presentation > character properties as well as sequences with variation

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

> Michael Everson hat am 6. April 2017 um 14:57 > geschrieben: > >> That's what this proposal is all about. It's a good and sound proposal, >> except for the empty square. > > Do you mean “except for the light and dark squares without a piece on them” or > “except for the

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On 6 Apr 2017, at 11:00, Christoph Päper wrote: > > Michael Everson : >> >> Standardized variation sequences are the best way to achieve this simply and >> without needless duplication. :-) > > I still agree with this assertion. So do I..

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

Mark Davis ☕️ : > > I'm looking forward to similar postings on checkers and go pieces. (...) > And I'm looking also forward to the ♖+ZWJ+⬛️ (etc) proposal. Well, actually ... Garth Wallace made an important observation in

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On 6 Apr 2017, at 04:24, Martin J. Dürst wrote: >> http://evertype.com/standards/unicode-list/looking-glass-yellow-blue.png > > [OT] > It looks neat. But I noticed three very small gaps in each of the top and > bottom borders. I have not done anything to optimize

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

Michael Everson : > > Standardized variation sequences are the best way to achieve this simply and > without needless duplication. :-) I still agree with this assertion. > > The distinction between white/black background might be of a different > > nature. If you have

RE: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

; unicode Unicode Discussion Aihe: Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation Amusing at this is, hard to believe that people are spending this much time on an April Fool's posting. I'm looking forward to similar postings on checkers and go pieces. As a matter

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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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: 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

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On Wed, 5 Apr 2017 01:02:32 +0100 Michael Everson wrote: > On 4 Apr 2017, at 18:54, Richard Wordingham > wrote: > > > > On Tue, 4 Apr 2017 01:30:05 +0100 > > Michael Everson wrote: > > > >>> I'm trying to work out

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On Mon, Apr 3, 2017 at 4:47 PM, Richard Wordingham < richard.wording...@ntlworld.com> wrote: > On Mon, 3 Apr 2017 23:35:52 +0100 > Michael Everson wrote: > > > On 3 Apr 2017, at 22:03, Richard Wordingham > > wrote: > > The relevant text

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On 4 Apr 2017, at 18:54, Richard Wordingham wrote: > > On Tue, 4 Apr 2017 01:30:05 +0100 > Michael Everson wrote: > >>> I'm trying to work out whether we need a variation sequence for "chesspiece >>> in a sentence”. >> >> Of course!

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On Tue, 4 Apr 2017 01:30:05 +0100 Michael Everson wrote: > > I'm trying to work out whether we need a variation sequence for > > "chesspiece in a sentence”. > > Of course! Haven’t you ever seen chess problem texts? Check out the > Fairy Chess proposal for encoding

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On 4 Apr 2017, at 17:58, Mark Davis ☕️ wrote: > Amusing at this is, hard to believe that people are spending this much time > on an April Fool's posting. I wondered how long it would take for someone to be taken in. The joke, of course, was hidden not inside the proposal,

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

Amusing at this is, hard to believe that people are spending this much time on an April Fool's posting. I'm looking forward to similar postings on checkers and go pieces. As a matter of fact, one that proposes adding new characters for every possible configuration of a go board would be

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

2017-04-04 1:30 GMT+02:00 Michael Everson : > On 3 Apr 2017, at 23:07, Asmus Freytag (c) wrote: > > > > On 4/3/2017 2:15 PM, Michael Everson wrote: > >> On 3 Apr 2017, at 17:16, Asmus Freytag wrote: > >> > > The same

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

On 2017/04/03 23:41, Kent Karlsson wrote: Hence the chess board lines should be displayed in a strong left-to-right context (either via bidi markup characters, or via some higher order bidi markup mechanism, such as the "bidi" attribute in HTML). Though in most cases (not Arabic/Hebrew/...

Re: Proposal to add standardized variation sequences for chess notation

Den 2017-04-04 00:35, skrev "Michael Everson" : >> What I am saying is that the glyphs for the two new variants you are >> proposing need to harmonise with the block elements such as U+2581 >> LOWER ONE EIGHTH BLOCK. > > NoŠ in a chess font the font designer has to draw

  1   2   >