EAW is used in fixed-width settings to distinguish characters that should
take up one space versus two. I would also prefer that all these be
considered wide, since otherwise it causes format problems in these
settigns.
(unfortunately fixed-width appear to be largley ignored by unicode... 🙁)
On Su
在 2018年3月5日週一 13:25,Martin J. Dürst via Unicode 寫道:
> Hello John,
>
> On 2018/03/01 12:31, via Unicode wrote:
>
> > Pen, or brush and paper is much more flexible. With thousands of names
> > of people and places still not encoded I am not sure if I would describe
> > hans (simplified Chinese char
Phake Nick wrote,
> In latin script, as an example, I can simply name myself
> "Phake", but in Chinese with current Unicode-based environment,
> it would not be possible for me to randomly name myself using
> a character ⿰牜爲
Isn't that U+246E8? "𤛨"
ah right that's it.
2018年3月5日 19:25 於 "James Kass" 寫道:
Phake Nick wrote,
> In latin script, as an example, I can simply name myself
> "Phake", but in Chinese with current Unicode-based environment,
> it would not be possible for me to randomly name myself using
> a character ⿰牜爲
Isn't that U
I think that fixed-width rendering properties for East-Asian characters was
meant only for rendering letters or symbols as plain-text, not for the new
rendering with emoji styles.
If the symbols are rendered as emojis, these properties don't apply at all,
the Emojis style overrides that completely.
Dear All,
to simplify discussion I have split the points.
On 05.03.2018 16:57, Phake Nick via Unicode wrote:
在 2018年3月5日週一 13:25,Martin J. Dürst via Unicode
寫道:
Hello John,
On 2018/03/01 12:31, via Unicode wrote:
Third, I cannot confirm or deny the "500 characters a year" limit,
but
I'm q
Dear All,
here is reply to points one and two.
On 05.03.2018 16:57, Phake Nick via Unicode wrote:
在 2018年3月5日週一 13:25,Martin J. Dürst via Unicode
寫道:
Hello John,
On 2018/03/01 12:31, via Unicode wrote:
> Pen, or brush and paper is much more flexible. With thousands of
names
> of people an
Hi,
I remember, the front page of the code charts by
Unicode has following note:
Fonts
The shapes of the reference glyphs used in these code
charts are not prescriptive. Considerable variation is
to be expected in actual fonts. The particular fonts
used in these charts were provided to the Unic
On Mon, Mar 5, 2018 at 9:03 AM, suzuki toshiya via Unicode <
unicode@unicode.org> wrote:
> I have a question; if some people try to make a
> translated version of Unicode, they should contact
> all font contributors and ask for the license?
> Unicode Consortium cannot give any sublicense?
>
If yo
John,
I think this may be giving the list a somewhat misleading picture of the
actual statistics for encoding of CJK unified ideographs. The "500
characters a year" or "1000 characters a year" limits are administrative
limits set by the IRG for national bodies (and others) submitting
repertoi
On 3/5/2018 9:03 AM, suzuki toshiya via
Unicode wrote:
I
have a question; if some people try to make a
translated version of Unicode, they should contact
all font contributors and ask for the license?
Unicode Consortium cannot g
On 3/5/2018 9:03 AM, suzuki toshiya via Unicode wrote:
I have a question; if some people try to make a
translated version of Unicode
And to add to Asmus' response, folks on the list should understand that
even with the best of effort, the concept of a "translated version of
Unicode" is a nea
There's been significant efforts to "translate" or more precisely "adapt"
significant parts of the standard with good presentations in Wikipedia and
various sites for scoped topics. So there are alternate charts, and instead
of translating all, the concepts are summarized, reexplained, but still
gi
13 matches
Mail list logo