> On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 04:06:06PM -0400, Benj. Mako Hill wrote:
>
> > If this is something you're serious about, you should bring this up on
> > the Unicode list. I haven't been on there for too long but I don't
> > recall a proposal like this coming by yet.
>
> Details about how to join the
On 11/08/2005, at 5:36 AM, Benj. Mako Hill wrote:
If this is something you're serious about, you should bring this up on
the Unicode list. I haven't been on there for too long but I don't
recall a proposal like this coming by yet.
Thanks for the suggestion, Mako. At the moment, I'm trying to
On Wed, Aug 10, 2005 at 04:06:06PM -0400, Benj. Mako Hill wrote:
> If this is something you're serious about, you should bring this up on
> the Unicode list. I haven't been on there for too long but I don't
> recall a proposal like this coming by yet.
Details about how to join the list?
Ciao,
> With the size of the Unicode set, there is nothing to stop there
> being a precomposed layout out there, as long as someone has created it.
I don't think that's necessarily true. Implementing precomposed and
decomposed characters in the same standard introduces two potential
encodings for the
On 08/08/2005, at 2:42 PM, Steve Langasek wrote:
With the size of the Unicode set, there is nothing to stop there
being a precomposed layout out there, as long as someone has
created it.
Er, it takes more than someone creating it -- it takes getting it
made part
of the Unicode standard
On Mon, Aug 08, 2005 at 02:16:55PM +0930, Clytie Siddall wrote:
> On 08/08/2005, at 5:41 AM, || स्वक्ष || svaksha wrote:
> >Hope that helps somewhat and sorry for the long post :)
> Not at all, it was very interesting and helpful.
> With the size of the Unicode set, there is nothing to stop ther
On 08/08/2005, at 5:41 AM, || स्वक्ष || svaksha wrote:
Hope that helps somewhat and sorry for the long post :)
Not at all, it was very interesting and helpful.
With the size of the Unicode set, there is nothing to stop there
being a precomposed layout out there, as long as someone has crea
On 8/7/05, Clytie Siddall <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> On 07/08/2005, at 5:44 PM, Steve Langasek wrote:
>
> > FWIW, I'm pretty sure there is no such thing as a precomposed
> > layout for
> > devanagari script; the combinatorics (pairing each possible vowel
> > sign with
> > each possible conson
On 07/08/2005, at 5:44 PM, Steve Langasek wrote:
Undoubtedly she should be using a precomposed layout, and i really
wonder if the charmap _is_ a precomposed layout, since the position
of diacritics varies in different apps, and that tends to be an
artifact of decomposed input, where the charact
On Sun, Aug 07, 2005 at 04:16:28PM +0930, Clytie Siddall wrote:
> >I visited http://www.linux-india.org/ with two different browsers.
> >The page is broken, but the importand thing can be seen:
> >The third line on the right has one of the vovel signs in question
> >applied, too.
> >I looked the
Jutta, this is getting really interesting from the UTF-8 point of
view. Thankyou for your findings. :)
On 07/08/2005, at 7:12 AM, Jutta Wrage wrote:
The following order is correct , but the final display on any
document
has mistakes.
Maybe an new discovery; I made, helps here:
I visited
11 matches
Mail list logo
