On Wed, 3 Jul 2013, Francois Gouget wrote:
>
> Wine uses three dots (...) rather than the Unicode ellipsis character
> (…) except in the Czech and Taiwanese translations that use the Unicode
> ellipsis character.
>
> I think we should be consistent but the question is which to use.
Ah found it
Francois Gouget wrote:
> So should we go with the flow and switch to using ellipsis characters or
> should we stick with three dots?
3 dots should be used in order to keep compatibility with bitmap fonts, fonts
that don't have the ellipsis glyph and ansi APIs
(GetMenuItemInfoA/GetWindowTextA).
Original Message
Subject: Re: RFC: Three dots or Unicode ellipsis character
Date: Wed, 03 Jul 2013 19:32:15 +0200
From: Michael Stefaniuc
To: Francois Gouget
On 07/03/2013 04:45 PM, Francois Gouget wrote:
>
> Wine uses three dots (...) rather than the Unicode el
On Wed, 3 Jul 2013 16:45:24 +0200 (CEST), Francois Gouget wrote:
> So should we go with the flow and switch to using ellipsis characters or
> should we stick with three dots?
In most Japanese fonts, ellipsis character (U+2026) is designed like
midline horizontal ellipsis (U+22EF).
For instance, p
Wine uses three dots (...) rather than the Unicode ellipsis character
(…) except in the Czech and Taiwanese translations that use the Unicode
ellipsis character.
I think we should be consistent but the question is which to use.
I looked at the Windows interface guidelines and they don't have
