On Fri, 8 Jun 2018 09:20:09 -0700, Steven R. Loomis via Unicode wrote:
[…]
> But, it sounds like the CLDR process was successful in this case. Thank you
>for contributing.
You are welcome, but thanks are due to the actual corporate contributors.
[…]
> Actually, I think the particular data item
When I'm looking at
https://unicode.org/Public/emoji/11.0/emoji-sequences.txt
It goes on line 16 that:
--
# type_field: any of {Emoji_Combining_Sequence, Emoji_Flag_Sequence,
Emoji_Modifier_Sequence}
# The type_field is a convenience for parsing the emoji sequence
files, and is not i
On Fri, 8 Jun 2018 20:45:26 +0200
Philippe Verdy via Unicode wrote:
> 2018-06-08 19:41 GMT+02:00 Richard Wordingham via Unicode <
> unicode@unicode.org>:
> The way tailoring is designed in CLDR using only data used by a
> generic algorithm, and not custom algorithm is not the only way to
> col
On Fri, 8 Jun 2018 14:14:51 -0700
"Steven R. Loomis via Unicode" wrote:
> > But the consortium has formally dropped the commitment to DUCET in
> > CLDR. Even when restricted to strings of assigned characters, the
> > CLDR and ICU no longer make the effort to support the DUCET
> > collation.
>
On 6/8/2018 2:28 PM, Marcel Schneider
via Unicode wrote:
On Fri, 8 Jun 2018 13:33:20 -0700, Asmus Freytag via Unicode wrote:
[…]
There's no value added in creating "mirrors" of something that is successfully being devel
On Fri, 8 Jun 2018 16:54:20 -0400, Tom Gewecke via Unicode wrote:
>
> > On Jun 8, 2018, at 9:52 AM, Marcel Schneider via Unicode wrote:
> >
> > People relevant to projects for French locale do trace the borderline of
> > applicability wider
> > than do those people who are closerly tied to Uni
On Fri, 8 Jun 2018 13:33:20 -0700, Asmus Freytag via Unicode wrote:
>
[…]
> There's no value added in creating "mirrors" of something that is
> successfully being developed and maintained under a different umbrella.
Wouldn’t the same be true for ISO/IEC 10646? It has no value added neither, and
Richard,
> But the consortium has formally dropped the commitment to DUCET in CLDR.
> Even when restricted to strings of assigned characters, the
> CLDR and ICU no longer make the effort to support the DUCET
> collation.
CLDR is not a collation implementation, it is a data repository with
associ
> On Jun 8, 2018, at 9:52 AM, Marcel Schneider via Unicode
> wrote:
>
> People relevant to projects for French locale do trace the borderline of
> applicability wider
> than do those people who are closerly tied to Unicode‐related projects.
Could you give a concrete example or two of what
On 6/8/2018 5:01 AM, Michael Everson
via Unicode wrote:
and achieving a fullscale merger with ISO/IEC 15897, after which the valid data stay hosted entirely in CLDR, and ISO/IEC 15897 would be its ISO mirror.
I wonder if Mark Davis will be qu
2018-06-08 19:41 GMT+02:00 Richard Wordingham via Unicode <
unicode@unicode.org>:
> On Fri, 8 Jun 2018 13:40:21 +0200
> Mark Davis ☕️ wrote:
>
> > Mark
> >
> > On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 10:06 AM, Richard Wordingham via Unicode <
> > unicode@unicode.org> wrote:
> >
> > > On Fri, 8 Jun 2018 05:32:51 +
On Fri, 8 Jun 2018 13:40:21 +0200
Mark Davis ☕️ wrote:
> Mark
>
> On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 10:06 AM, Richard Wordingham via Unicode <
> unicode@unicode.org> wrote:
>
> > On Fri, 8 Jun 2018 05:32:51 +0200 (CEST)
> > Marcel Schneider via Unicode wrote:
> >
> > > Thank you for confirming. All w
Marcel,
On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 6:52 AM, Marcel Schneider via Unicode <
unicode@unicode.org> wrote:
>
> What got me started is that before even I requested a submitter ID (and
> the reason why I’ve requested one),
> "Characters | Category | Label | keycap" remained untranslated, i.e. its
> French t
On Fri, 8 Jun 2018 08:50:28 -0400, Tom Gewecke via Unicode wrote:
>
>
> > On Jun 7, 2018, at 11:32 PM, Marcel Schneider via Unicode wrote:
> >
> > What bothered me ... is that the registration of the French locale in CLDR
> > is
> > still surprisingly incomplete
>
> Could you provide an exam
On Fri, 8 Jun 2018 13:06:18 +0200, Mark Davis ☕️ via Unicode wrote:
>
> Where are you getting your "facts"? Among many unsubstantiated or ambiguous
> claims in that very long sentence:
>
> > "French locale in CLDR is still surprisingly incomplete".
>
> For each release, the data collected for th
> On Jun 7, 2018, at 11:32 PM, Marcel Schneider via Unicode
> wrote:
>
> What bothered me ... is that the registration of the French locale in CLDR is
> still surprisingly incomplete
Could you provide an example or two?
> On 8 Jun 2018, at 11:07, Henri Sivonen via Unicode
> wrote:
>
> My question is:
>
> When designing a syntax where tokens with the user-chosen characters
> can't occur next to each other without some syntax-reserved characters
> between them, what advantages are there from limiting the user-
On 8 June 2018 at 13:01, Michael Everson via Unicode
wrote:
>
> I wonder if Mark Davis will be quick to agree with me 😅 when I say that
> ISO/IEC 15897 has no use and should be withdrawn.
It was reviewed and confirmed in 2017, so the next systematic review
won't be until 2022. And as the standar
On 8 Jun 2018, at 04:32, Marcel Schneider via Unicode
wrote:
> the registration of the French locale in CLDR is still surprisingly
> incomplete despite the meritorious efforts made by the actual contributors
Nothing prevents people from working to complete the French locale in CLDR.
Synchroni
On 7 Jun 2018, at 20:13, Marcel Schneider via Unicode
wrote:
> On Fri, 18 May 2018 00:29:36 +0100, Michael Everson via Unicode responded:
>>
>> It would be great if mutual synchronization were considered to be of benefit.
>> Some of us in SC2 are not happy that the Unicode Consortium has publis
Mark
On Fri, Jun 8, 2018 at 10:06 AM, Richard Wordingham via Unicode <
unicode@unicode.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 8 Jun 2018 05:32:51 +0200 (CEST)
> Marcel Schneider via Unicode wrote:
>
> > Thank you for confirming. All witnesses concur to invalidate the
> > statement about uniqueness of ISO/IEC 106
Where are you getting your "facts"? Among many unsubstantiated or ambiguous
claims in that very long sentence:
1. "French locale in CLDR is still surprisingly incomplete".
1. For each release, the data collected for the French locale is
complete to the bar we have set for Level=Mode
On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 2:55 PM, Henri Sivonen wrote:
> Considering that ruling out too much can be a problem later, but just
> treating anything above ASCII as opaque hasn't caused trouble (that I
> know of) for HTML other than compatibility issues with XML's stricter
> stance, why should a progra
On Fri, 8 Jun 2018 05:32:51 +0200 (CEST)
Marcel Schneider via Unicode wrote:
> Thank you for confirming. All witnesses concur to invalidate the
> statement about uniqueness of ISO/IEC 10646 ‐ Unicode synchrony. —
> After being invented in its actual form, sorting was standardized
> simultaneously
24 matches
Mail list logo