Re: Digits (Was: What a difference a glyph makes...)

From: John Cowan (jcowan@reutershealth.com)
Date: Thu Jul 27 2000 - 15:20:14 EDT

Next message: Abdul Malik: "Re: Bangla(Bengali) letter Missing"
Previous message: Kenneth Whistler: "UTF8 question"
Maybe in reply to: Valeriy E. Ushakov: "Digits (Was: What a difference a glyph makes...)"
Next in thread: Peter_Constable@sil.org: "Re: Digits (Was: What a difference a glyph makes...)"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

> The line gets drawn somewhere, and
> there's a very strong consensus that Unicode is right in not having
> abstract characters to denote things like bold and italic.

Except in math symbols, where Unicode will soon acquire them. In
math, _sin_ would be the product of _s_, _i_, and _n_, whereas
non-italic "sin" stands for "sine".

-- 
Schlingt dreifach einen Kreis um dies! || John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>
Schliesst euer Aug vor heiliger Schau,  || http://www.reutershealth.com
Denn er genoss vom Honig-Tau,           || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
Und trank die Milch vom Paradies.            -- Coleridge (tr. Politzer)

Next message: Abdul Malik: "Re: Bangla(Bengali) letter Missing"
Previous message: Kenneth Whistler: "UTF8 question"
Maybe in reply to: Valeriy E. Ushakov: "Digits (Was: What a difference a glyph makes...)"
Next in thread: Peter_Constable@sil.org: "Re: Digits (Was: What a difference a glyph makes...)"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:06 EDT