On 9/23/2012 6:35 AM, Paul Crawford wrote:
> The point I was hoping to make was not to denigrate the desirability of
> a single universal character set, but about the specific idea of USC-2
> representation.
>
> For example, it is (was?) the case that if you wanted to properly use
> multi-language
On 23/09/12 05:03, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On 23/09/12 04:29, Paul Crawford wrote:
What I hate about unicode was the idea of adopting 16-bit characters and
thus breaking so much byte-orientated code that was written, tested, and
integrated over the history of computing.
You make it sound like
On 23/09/12 03:44, DLSauers wrote:
On Fri, 21 Sep 2012 23:59:09 +1000, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
On 21/09/12 20:58, DLSauers wrote:
The rest of the world AND the *nineteenth* century wants to say a few
words to you. ASCII was crap from the moment it was invented -- there
I don't agree, and thats
On 23/09/12 04:29, Paul Crawford wrote:
What I hate about unicode was the idea of adopting 16-bit characters and
thus breaking so much byte-orientated code that was written, tested, and
integrated over the history of computing.
You make it sound like the Unicode Consortium hacked into people's
On 09/22/2012 11:29 AM, Paul Crawford wrote:
But yes to all who point out MS' deficiencies in following simple
standards, it is almost like they want to prevent interoperability...
It's not original, but, "Microsoft follows standards like caribou follow
migrating salmon."
___
On 21/09/12 14:59, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
(Although in fairness, given the technical limitations back in 1963, the
designers of ASCII did a reasonable job of making something that was usable
for a subset of American English.)
Therein lies the problem - in 1960s there was damn-all chance of a
Rhialto posted on Sat, 22 Sep 2012 00:15:00 +0200 as excerpted:
> The problem with Microsoft software is that it *often* claims to produce
> Latin-1 encoding (aka ISO-8859-1) but actually produces Windows codepage
> 1252 ("windows-1252"). Those are mostly the same, apare from the control
> charact
On Fri 21 Sep 2012 at 10:58:31 +, DLSauers wrote:
> On Thu, 20 Sep 2012 14:36:21 +1000, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>
> > Short answer: it's an encoding problem. Some doofus is probably pasting
> > so-called "Smart Quotes" from Microsoft Word into their post, and their
> > news reader program (or G
On Sat, 22 Sep 2012 01:09:56 +1000
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> On 22/09/12 00:07, Brian Morrison wrote:
> > On Fri, 21 Sep 2012 23:59:09 +1000
> > Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> >
> >> Heavy metal: Blue Öyster Cult, Motörhead, Mötley Crüe, Наӥв
> >
> > Say that last one again? ;-)
>
>
> "Наӥв", very ro
On Sat, Sep 22, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> I assume that the umlaut over the и is just for the look, and
> doesn't change the pronunciation.
IIRC it does. It turns a hard vocal into a soft one.
--Daniel
___
Pan-users mailing list
Pan-users@nongnu.org
ht
On Thu, 20 Sep 2012 14:36:21 +1000, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> http://www.joelonsoftware.com/articles/Unicode.html
>
Thank you so much for that link! It explained in one comprehensible non-
programmer-exclusive chunk things I have been barely understanding around
the edges of for years. Highly rec
On 22/09/12 00:07, Brian Morrison wrote:
On Fri, 21 Sep 2012 23:59:09 +1000
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
Heavy metal: Blue Öyster Cult, Motörhead, Mötley Crüe, Наӥв
Say that last one again? ;-)
"Наӥв", very roughly pronounced something like "Narev". It's
Russian.
I assume that the umlaut over
On Fri, 21 Sep 2012 23:59:09 +1000, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>
> The rest of the world AND the *nineteenth* century wants to say a few
> words to you. ASCII was crap from the moment it was invented -- there
> has never been a time, not even one single minute, that ASCII has been
> sufficient for eve
On Fri, 21 Sep 2012 23:59:09 +1000
Steven D'Aprano wrote:
> Heavy metal: Blue Öyster Cult, Motörhead, Mötley Crüe, Наӥв
Say that last one again? ;-)
--
Brian Morrison
___
Pan-users mailing list
Pan-users@nongnu.org
https://lists.nongnu.org/mailman/
On 21/09/12 20:58, DLSauers wrote:
On Thu, 20 Sep 2012 14:36:21 +1000, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
Short answer: it's an encoding problem. Some doofus is probably pasting
so-called "Smart Quotes" from Microsoft Word into their post, and their
news reader program (or Google Groups *spit*) is not adju
On Thu, Sep 20, 2012 at 01:33:29AM +, DLSauers wrote:
> Annoying characters in posts:
>
>
>
> Is there some font setting or something that can remove these annoying
> glyhps or what ever they are...
Short answer: it's an encoding problem. Some doofus is probably pasting
so-called "Sm
16 matches
Mail list logo
