Re: A sketch with the best-known Swiss tongue twister

> In summary you do not object the fact that unqualified "gsw" language code ​Whether I object or not makes no​ difference. Whether for good or for bad, the gsw code (clearly originally for German-Swiss from the code letters) has been expanded beyond the borders of Switzerland. There are also

Re: Unicode Emoji 11.0 characters now ready for adoption!

On 3/9/2018 9:29 AM, via Unicode wrote: Documented increase such as scientific terms for new elements, flora and fauna, would seem to be not more one or two dozen a year. Indeed. Of the "urgently needed characters" added to the unified CJK ideographs for Unicode 11.0, two were obscure

Re: A sketch with the best-known Swiss tongue twister

Is that just for Switzerland in one of the local dialectal variants ? Or more generally Alemannic (also in Northeastern France, South Germany, Western Austria, Liechtenstein, Northern Italy). 2018-03-09 12:09 GMT+01:00 Mark Davis ☕️ via Unicode : >

Re: Unicode Emoji 11.0 characters now ready for adoption!

On 2018/03/09 10:17, Philippe Verdy via Unicode wrote: This still leaves the question about how to write personal names ! IDS alone cannot represent them without enabling some "reasonable" ligaturing (they don't have to match the exact strokes variants for optimal placement, or with all possible

Re: Unicode Emoji 11.0 characters now ready for adoption!

On 2018/03/09 10:22, Philippe Verdy via Unicode wrote: As well how Chinese/Japanese post offices handle addresses written with sinograms for personal names ? Is the expanded IDS form acceptable for them, or do they require using Romanized addresses, or phonetic approximations (Bopomofo in China,

A sketch with the best-known Swiss tongue twister

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QOwITNazUKg De Papscht hät z’Schpiäz s’Schpäkchbschtekch z’schpaat bschtellt. literally: The Pope has [in Spiez] [the bacon cutlery] [too late] ordered. Mark

Re: Translating the standard

On 3/9/2018 6:58 AM, Marcel Schneider via Unicode wrote: As of translating the Core spec as a whole, why did two recent attempts crash even before the maintenance stage, while the 3.1 project succeeded? Essentially because both the Japanese and the Chinese attempts were conceived of as

Re: A sketch with the best-known Swiss tongue twister

2018-03-09 12:09 GMT+01:00 Mark Davis ☕️ via Unicode : De Papscht hät z’Schpiäz s’Schpäkchbschtekch z’schpaat bschtellt. literally: The Pope has [in Spiez] [the bacon cutlery] [too late] ordered. Am 2018-03-09 um 12:52 schrieb

Re: A sketch with the best-known Swiss tongue twister

> On Mar 9, 2018, at 5:52 AM, Philippe Verdy via Unicode > wrote: > > So the "best-known Swiss tongue" is still not so much known, and still > incorrectly referenced (frequently confused with "Swiss German", which is > much like standard High German I think Swiss German

Re: A sketch with the best-known Swiss tongue twister

English Wikipedia is not a good reference for the name; the GSW wiki states clearly another name and "Alemannic" is attested and correct for the family of dialects. "Schweizerdeutsch" is also wrong like "Swiss German" when it refers to Alsatian (neither Swiss nor German for those speaking it):

Re: A sketch with the best-known Swiss tongue twister

So the "best-known Swiss tongue" is still not so much known, and still incorrectly referenced (frequently confused with "Swiss German", which is much like standard High German, unifying with it on most aspects, with only minor orthographic preferences such as capitalization rules or very few

Re: A sketch with the best-known Swiss tongue twister

There are definitely many dialects across Switzerland. I think that for *this* phrase it would be roughly the same for most of the population, with minor differences (eg 'het' vs 'hät'). But a native speaker like Martin would be able to say for sure. Mark On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 12:52 PM,

Re: A sketch with the best-known Swiss tongue twister

Yes, the right English names are "Swiss High German" for de-CH, and "Swiss German" for gsw-CH. Mark On Fri, Mar 9, 2018 at 2:40 PM, Tom Gewecke via Unicode wrote: > > > On Mar 9, 2018, at 5:52 AM, Philippe Verdy via Unicode < > unicode@unicode.org> wrote: > > > > So the

Re: A sketch with the best-known Swiss tongue twister

In summary you do not object the fact that unqualified "gsw" language code is not (and should not be) named "Swiss German" (as it is only for "gsw-CH", not for any other non-Swiss variants of Alemannic). The addition of "High" is optional, unneeded in fact, as it does not remove any ambiguity, in

Re: Translating the standard (was: Re: Fonts and font sizes used in the Unicode)

On 08/03/18 19:33, Arthur Reutenauer wrote: > > On Thu, Mar 08, 2018 at 07:05:06PM +0100, Marcel Schneider via Unicode wrote: > > https://www.amazon.fr/Unicode-5-0-pratique-Patrick-Andries/dp/2100511408/ref=pd_bbs_sr_1?ie=UTF8=books=1206989878=8-1 > > You’re

Re: Unicode Emoji 11.0 characters now ready for adoption!

Dear Richard, On 09.03.2018 07:06, Richard Wordingham via Unicode wrote: On Thu, 08 Mar 2018 09:42:38 +0800 via Unicode wrote: to the best of my knowledge virtually no new characters used just for names are under consideration, all the ones that are under consideration

Re: Unicode Emoji 11.0 characters now ready for adoption!

On 09.03.2018 09:17, Philippe Verdy via Unicode wrote: This still leaves the question about how to write personal names ! IDS alone cannot represent them without enabling some "reasonable" ligaturing (they dont have to match the exact strokes variants for optimal placement, or with all possible