busmanus wrote:
> The relevant point here seems to be the language the word is in (I
> understand Unicode also has standard language markers defined in its
> inventory).
Not exactly. It does have language tag characters in the range U+E0001
through U+E007F, which can be used to form language ta
From: "busmanus" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> I am not sure about the relevance of the Meteg problem, but I do know
> about a case, where different relative positions of the same
> diacriticals are used for conveying a semantic distinction. In a big
> reference work about verse metrics in the world's lang
W liÅcie z piÄ, 23-07-2004, godz. 18:01 +0200, Philipp Reichmuth
napisaÅ:
> However, to return to the original problem, I don't remember ever having
> seen a data where it would be necessary to distinguish between trema and
> diaeresis in the data itself.
A similar issue: a Polish encyclopaedia I
Peter Kirk schrieb:
May be, but it doesn't matter - no german reader would ever take
any combination of diacritics for an umlaut + something else,
because in german such combinations simply doesn't exist.
Only the tréma alone could be confused.
The German readers' instincts would probably be wrong
Peter Kirk wrote:
>> Nobody doubts that some text exists with multiple accents on vowels.
>> Where the vowels are not Latin a,o,u, there is no issue at all, in
>> this case, since there are no differences in German sorting for them.
>
> Well, yes, but http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/n2819.p
On 15/07/2004 10:56, Dominikus Scherkl (MGW) wrote:
Secondly, the dieresis is used to indicate that two vowels are
pronounced separately. I haven't seen a case where the vowels would
already be accented.
There are such cases
May be, but it doesn't matter - no german reader would e
On 15/07/2004 10:32, Asmus Freytag wrote:
Nobody doubts that some text exists with multiple accents on vowels.
Where the vowels are not Latin a,o,u, there is no issue at all, in
this case, since there are no differences in German sorting for them. ...
Well, yes, but http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/
> > Secondly, the dieresis is used to indicate that two vowels are
> > pronounced separately. I haven't seen a case where the vowels would
> > already be accented.
> There are such cases
May be, but it doesn't matter - no german reader would ever take
any combination of diacritics for an umlau
Nobody doubts that some text exists with multiple accents on vowels. Where
the vowels are not Latin a,o,u, there is no issue at all, in this case,
since there are no differences in German sorting for them. Where the vowels
are a, o, u, as for the Livonian example you cited, it's a matter of the
On 15/07/2004 05:00, Asmus Freytag wrote:
At 01:52 PM 7/14/2004, Doug Ewell wrote:
It's not German data (with umlauts) that will be affected by this
solution, but non-German data (with diaereses) in German bibliographic
systems. That makes it a much smaller problem.
the use of diaeresis is perfec
Doug Ewell scripsit:
> CGJ + COMBINING DIAERESIS is a hack, but then again the need to draw a
> distinction between the exact same combining mark used for two different
> phonetic purposes is a bit of a hack too.
However, there used to be typographical distinctions in certain German
fonts between
Peter Kirk wrote:
> But now it seems that WG2, and apparently also the UTC, has decided to
> accept an encoding using CGJ as a pseudo-variation selector applied to
> a combining mark (although positioned before it instead of after it),
> despite it having all of the effects of confusing normalisa
I was surprised to see that WG2 has accepted a proposal made by the US
National Body (is this not more or less the same as the UTC) to use CGJ
to distinguish between Umlaut and Tréma in German bibliographic data.
See http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/n2819.pdf for the proposal;
see also htt
13 matches
Mail list logo
