2007/2/24, Andy Pepperdine <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>:
On Friday 23 February 2007 22:50, M Henri Day wrote: > 2007/2/23, John Jason Jordan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>: > > On Fri, 23 Feb 2007 10:47:39 +0100 [...] > > Well, JJJ, that was interesting information indeed ! I have always just > assumed that the hexadecimal code for Unicode glyphs was the four-digit > code given in the Table de caractères Unicode > (http://unicode.coeurlumiere.com/) and found be combining the denomination > of the row (minus the last digit) with that of the column. You can see all the scripts at the official Unicode site: http://www.unicode.org/charts/ where you can download the PDF charts for any blocks you need. You will also notice that the most recent Unicode standard has over 90 000 glyphs and so needs more than 4 hex digits, in fact they've spread it so that it now uses 18 bits at most (eg. the Ideograph supplement). What MS intend doing with that when they have defined their Unicode characters to be 2 bytes remains to be seen. On Linux, a unicode character was often 4 bytes, but not always, and I've seen on the dev list for OOo that they are working on making all characters available as they have a few corners where the assumption of two bytes cannot be immediately corrected. I suspect the Linux input methods will have no difficulties on a 32bit or larger word size machine. [...] -- Andy Pepperdine
Thanks, Andy ! With all those glyphs registered - the larger Chinese dictionaries tend to contain around 50 000 variations - your quite right : 16⁴ doesn't suffice ! In any event, with the information you provide, it's possible for each interested user to construct his or her own table containing frequently used glyphs, save it for reference, and using the Ctrl + Shift + u, hex code, space-bar method, reproduce these symbols directly from the keyboard. At least it works for my Ubuntu distro - how well it works for Windows users I cannot say. Hope one of them will post to this thread and let us know !... My only (?) remaining problem, aside from what seems to be the randomness of the degree of correspondence between the addresses of the symbols listed in the Table de caractères Unicode and that listed at the official Unicode site, is that there still remain glyphs, most importantly Chinese ones, which are listed in Unicode, but which I can neither read nor write. I've downloaded all the fonts I can find, but perhaps I've missed a source which includes all Unicode glyphs ? This is perhaps more an OS than an OO.oquestion, but if you - or anyone else - could in that case point me to it, I'd be pleased indeed !... Henri
