10:53 a.m.
Hello
I sent this mail to the list via gmane and it did not pass it seems, so I
send it again.
From time to time I receive documents or mail in which the
symbol ’ is used, as in j’ai instead of j'ai.
Now this is perfectly displayed (en encoded via UTF8) in
21.5.31 Mule, however I cannot find any input method for
this symbol.
Well this is not entirely true. latin-ltx includes it:
typing \rq results in ’
but this looks cumbersome.
Uwe Brauer
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
10:12 a.m.
Uwe Brauer writes:
Hello
I sent this mail to the list via gmane and it did not pass it seems, so I
send it again.
>From time to time I receive documents or mail in which the
symbol ’ is used, as in j’ai instead of j'ai.
You don't want that if you can avoid it (that's a RIGHT SINGLE
QUOTATION MARK, U+2019). You want ʼ, if your fonts have it (that's
MODIFIER LETTER APOSTROPHE U+02BC, which is preferred to the ASCII
apostrophe).
Now this is perfectly displayed (en encoded via UTF8) in
21.5.31 Mule, however I cannot find any input method for
this symbol.
You'll probably have to make one. It's easy enough to add to Quail
input methods, say latin-9-prefix (or whatever seems most useful to
you).
Eg, for latin-9-prefix add
("''" ?ʼ)
at around line 75 of latin-euro-input.el (use find-library to get it,
don't forget to byte-compile!) If that doesn't work, first check for
load-path shadows (M-x list-load-path-shadows).
Quail probably ought to be revised to make it possible to "cascade"
input method tables, but I don't think that's ever been done, so the
best you can do for now is to just change the input method you prefer
locally.
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
9:23 p.m.
> On Thu, 24 May 2012 18:12:19 +0900, "Stephen J.
Turnbull" <turnbull(a)sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> wrote:
You don't want that if you can avoid it (that's a RIGHT
SINGLE
QUOTATION MARK, U+2019). You want ʼ, if your fonts have it (that's
MODIFIER LETTER APOSTROPHE U+02BC, which is preferred to the ASCII
apostrophe).
The issue is babel.el a package which allows to send text
to any of these translating servers, such as
google-translate [1]
or babelfish. Babelfish however does not work
with
J'ai une voiture
It gives:
J' have a car
I already hear you telling me that one should fix, babel.el
but I have no time at the moment to look into that further
and the actual maintainer is a GNU emacs user.
However
Jʼai une voiture
works fine, so I will stick with this kludge for the moment.
You'll probably have to make one. It's easy enough to add to
Quail
input methods, say latin-9-prefix (or whatever seems most useful to
you).
Eg, for latin-9-prefix add
("''" ?ʼ)
at around line 75 of latin-euro-input.el (use find-library to get
it,
don't forget to byte-compile!) If that doesn't work, first check for
load-path shadows (M-x list-load-path-shadows).
I did that
("''" ?ʼ)
("`A" ?À)
("`E" ?È)
("`I" ?Ì)
("`O" ?Ò)
("`U" ?Ù)
("`a" ?à)
byte compiled etc,
(set-input-method "latin-9-prefix")
but while
`a --> à
''--> ''
(M-x list-load-path-shadows).
Did not show that latin-euro-input is shadowed.
Footnotes:
[1] the google interface is de functional at the moment,
since google changes its API every second month at it
has been increasingly difficult to catch up.
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
4:53 p.m.
On 2012-05-24, Stephen J. Turnbull <turnbull(a)sk.tsukuba.ac.jp> wrote:
You don't want that if you can avoid it (that's a RIGHT
SINGLE
QUOTATION MARK, U+2019). You want ʼ, if your fonts have it (that's
MODIFIER LETTER APOSTROPHE U+02BC, which is preferred to the ASCII
apostrophe).
No.
U+2019 is the preferred character for all normal uses of apostrophe.
The modifier letter, as the name suggests, is for use in the phonetic
symbol for ejectives, where it modifies the preceding letter. (I doubt
anybody uses it, though - I certainly don't.)
See Unicode Standard section 6.2 on apostrophes.
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
10:29 a.m.
Julian Bradfield writes:
On 2012-05-24, Stephen J. Turnbull <turnbull(a)sk.tsukuba.ac.jp>
wrote:
> You don't want that if you can avoid it (that's a RIGHT SINGLE
> QUOTATION MARK, U+2019). You want ʼ, if your fonts have it (that's
> MODIFIER LETTER APOSTROPHE U+02BC, which is preferred to the ASCII
> apostrophe).
No.
U+2019 is the preferred character for all normal uses of apostrophe.
The modifier letter, as the name suggests, is for use in the phonetic
symbol for ejectives, where it modifies the preceding letter. (I doubt
anybody uses it, though - I certainly don't.)
See Unicode Standard section 6.2 on apostrophes.
Uh, which version? Version 2.0 clearly states of U+02BC "This is the
preferred character for apostrophe" while it doesn't mention use of
U+2019 as an apostrophe. I find U+02BC more plausible than U+2019 for
use as apostrophe. The apostrophe is not a quotation mark (a
delimiter), it is an ellipsis (indicating that content has been
removed), and should have its own character. The only real excuse I
can find for using U+2019 as apostrophe is that nobody uses the others
and it looks like an apostrophe, and that's kind of weak, you know.
I don't question that maybe they've changed this in later versions,
but then again, maybe they've changed it back since the version you're
referencing! ;-)
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
10:52 a.m.
Stephen writes:
Julian Bradfield writes:
> No.
> U+2019 is the preferred character for all normal uses of apostrophe.
> The modifier letter, as the name suggests, is for use in the phonetic
> symbol for ejectives, where it modifies the preceding letter. (I doubt
> anybody uses it, though - I certainly don't.)
> See Unicode Standard section 6.2 on apostrophes.
Uh, which version? Version 2.0 clearly states of U+02BC "This is
the
Version 2.0???? That's so antique I don't even have a copy!
I'm talking about the current version, of course - and indeed every
version after version 2.
U+2019 as an apostrophe. I find U+02BC more plausible than U+2019
for
use as apostrophe. The apostrophe is not a quotation mark (a
I don't. Suppose you're writing in a language with ejectives
(e.g. most of America). Having apostrophe being the same as the
ejective symbol is a lot worse than having apostrophe be the same as
quotation mark, as it has been for many centuries.
Of course it would be more elegant to have yet another character...
I don't know what the arguments were, but I could ask on the Unicode
list if you're curious.
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
6:43 a.m.
Julian Bradfield writes:
I don't know what the arguments were [for changing the
recommended
character for apostrophe], but I could ask on the Unicode list if
you're curious.
Not really curious, just disappointed. But "worse is better" so I'll
go with the existing standard.
Steve
_______________________________________________
XEmacs-Beta mailing list
XEmacs-Beta(a)xemacs.org
http://lists.xemacs.org/mailman/listinfo/xemacs-beta
4540
days inactive
4549
days old
6 comments
4 participants
participants (4)
-
Julian Bradfield -
Stephen J. Turnbull -
Stephen J. Turnbull -
Uwe Brauer