nalyzing them in a linguistic context,
these letters are read differently ("a" vs. "alpha", which is in fact not
really a distrinction of the script but on the linguistic tradition of
alphabets for as spelled for the vocal language), and the graphemes do not
have any case pairings, w
baries”, stuff would probably never
have gotten done. Engineers are usually better at this than scientists (or
politicians).
>> Type 1 has also been called “phono-graphemes” (…).
>
> Seems a good term, I was not aware of it. Do you happen to remember who
> introduced it?
My oldest quote is
16
> wrz 2016, 23:51:38):
>
> Janusz S. Bień <jsb...@mimuw.edu.pl>:
>
>
> 1. Graphemes, if I understand correctly, are language
> dependent, …
>
>
> That’s tr
Janusz S. Bień <jsb...@mimuw.edu.pl>:On Sun, Sep 18 2016 at 12:26 CEST, jsb...@mimuw.edu.pl writes:Quote/Cytat - Christoph Päper <christoph.pae...@crissov.de> (pią, 16wrz 2016, 23:51:38):Janusz S. Bień <jsb...@mimuw.edu.pl>:1. Graphemes, if I understand correctly, are language
spellings of the same word in a writing system, a useful linguistic
>>> definition of grapheme should ensure that all three variants have
>>> the same number of graphemes.
>>
>> Such a bizarre definition, which would also entail "color/colour",
>>
On 9/20/2016 12:30 AM, Julian Bradfield wrote:
are all legal spellings of the same word in a writing system, a useful
linguistic definition of grapheme should ensure that all three variants have
the same number of graphemes.
Such a bizarre definition, which would also entail "color/c
>> grapheme should ensure that all three variants have the same number of
>> graphemes.
>
> Such a bizarre definition, which would also entail "color/colour",
> "fulfill/fulfil", "sulfur/sulphur" having the same number of
> graphemes,
It’s n
is not used in the standard at all.
Searching the Unicode site I found only one use of 'grapheme' alone:
http://www.unicode.org/L2/L2000/00274-N2236-grapheme-joiner.htm
Graphemes are sequences of one or more encoded characters that
correspond to what users think of as character
On 6/20/2012 8:09 PM, Shriramana Sharma wrote:
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 7:13 AM, Ken Whistlerk...@sybase.com wrote:
I don't see any necessary correlation between what sequences
people might end up insisting on naming (for whatever reason) and what
people might consider to be graphemes.
I
On 21 Jun 2012, at 04:09, Shriramana Sharma wrote:
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 7:13 AM, Ken Whistler k...@sybase.com wrote:
I don't see any necessary correlation between what sequences
people might end up insisting on naming (for whatever reason) and what
people might consider to be graphemes
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 12:11 PM, Asmus Freytag asm...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
But the point is not just the sequence, but also the name for it. What do
you propose?
Well I couldn't propose a name conforming to the naming rules without
revealing what was munged up, could I? :-)
On Thu, Jun 21,
OK. Will they always be in NFC?
To apply Ken's dictume to this case:
That seems like a straitjacket looking for an unwilling wearer. ;-)
Unless it's excluded from the start, anytime you limit it, when the time
comes you need something like that, you have to invent a new
On 06/21/2012 01:45 PM, Asmus Freytag wrote:
OK. Will they always be in NFC?
To apply Ken's dictume to this case:
That seems like a straitjacket looking for an unwilling wearer. ;-)
Unless it's excluded from the start, anytime you limit it, when the time
comes you need something
On 6/21/2012 7:51 PM, Karl Williamson wrote:
On 06/21/2012 01:45 PM, Asmus Freytag wrote:
OK. Will they always be in NFC?
To apply Ken's dictume to this case:
That seems like a straitjacket looking for an unwilling wearer. ;-)
Unless it's excluded from the start, anytime you
On 6/21/2012 2:56 AM, Shriramana Sharma wrote:
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 12:11 PM, Asmus Freytagasm...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
But the point is not just the sequence, but also the name for it. What do
you propose?
Well I couldn't propose a name conforming to the naming rules without
revealing what
On Fri, Jun 22, 2012 at 9:06 AM, Asmus Freytag asm...@ix.netcom.com wrote:
U+ MARK D A V I S :) :) ;)
(incidentally, it would be equivalent to the more pithy U+ MARK DAVIS
as spaces are ignored in character names... )
Heh -- don't you think that should be DAVIS MARK? :-)
Precedents
All current named sequences appear to be each a single grapheme. That
seems like it should always be the case. If I'm right, should UAX #34
say this.
sequences
people might end up insisting on naming (for whatever reason) and what
people might consider to be graphemes. There could be a valid reason
somebody might want or need to name some sequence that clearly wouldn't
constitute a grapheme. Who can predict?
If I'm right, should UAX #34 say
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 7:13 AM, Ken Whistler k...@sybase.com wrote:
I don't see any necessary correlation between what sequences
people might end up insisting on naming (for whatever reason) and what
people might consider to be graphemes.
I submit that the following sequence shall be allotted
Hello,
I would like to clarify a point which, I guess, is rather related to UCS's
character set than to Unicode properly speaking.
Say I have a sequence of codes, each representing an UCS abstract character,
itself beeing the representation of a text. The text is the french word âme
(soul).
-bou...@unicode.org]
On Behalf Of spir
Sent: Wednesday, October 13, 2010 4:03 AM
To: unicode
Subject: composite graphemes
Hello,
I would like to clarify a point which, I guess, is rather related
to UCS's character set than to Unicode properly speaking.
Say I have a sequence of codes
21 matches
Mail list logo
