RE: So much for Unicode being character-based, not glyph-based

From: Doug Ewell (doug@ewellic.org)
Date: Fri Dec 17 2010 - 10:32:18 CST

Next message: William_J_G Overington: "A font with three emoji in plane 1"

Previous message: Leonardo Boiko: "Re: So much for Unicode being character-based, not glyph-based"
Maybe in reply to: Shriramana Sharma: "So much for Unicode being character-based, not glyph-based"
Next in thread: John H. Jenkins: "Re: So much for Unicode being character-based, not glyph-based"
Reply: John H. Jenkins: "Re: So much for Unicode being character-based, not glyph-based"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

> °ღ•ŚℋÚßℋÁℳ ŚℋÁℛℳÁ●•٠·˙

This doesn't prove anything about Unicode being glyph-based or
character-based. It demonstrates that Unicode encodes a lot of letters
and symbols, some of which are rendered with glyphs that look similar to
others.

--
Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA | http://www.ewellic.org
RFC 5645, 4645, UTN #14 | ietf-languages @ is dot gd slash 2kf0s

Next message: William_J_G Overington: "A font with three emoji in plane 1"
Previous message: Leonardo Boiko: "Re: So much for Unicode being character-based, not glyph-based"
Maybe in reply to: Shriramana Sharma: "So much for Unicode being character-based, not glyph-based"
Next in thread: John H. Jenkins: "Re: So much for Unicode being character-based, not glyph-based"
Reply: John H. Jenkins: "Re: So much for Unicode being character-based, not glyph-based"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Dec 17 2010 - 10:36:42 CST