Re: alternative names for letterlike symbols(was..Re: Release of Unicode 4.0)

From: Mark Davis (mark.davis@jtcsv.com)
Date: Mon Apr 21 2003 - 23:03:42 EDT

  • Next message: Jungshik Shin: "Re: alternative names for letterlike symbols(was..Re: Release of Unicode 4.0)"

    > OK. I see, but I wish they were not because we haven't had a chance
    > to directly review them (other than those in UTRs for which we had
    > ample time to review and give feedbak)

    You *did* get a chance. All of the sections that you reference are in the
    nameslist, which was available in the beta of the Unicode Character Database
    for quite a while.

    http://www.unicode.org/Public/4.0-Update/NamesList-4.0.0.txt

    Mark
    (مرقص بن داود)
    ________
    mark.davis@jtcsv.com
    IBM, MS 50-2/B11, 5600 Cottle Rd, SJ CA 95193
    (408) 256-3148
    fax: (408) 256-0799

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Jungshik Shin" <jshin@mailaps.org>
    To: "Kenneth Whistler" <kenw@sybase.com>
    Cc: <unicode@unicode.org>
    Sent: Monday, April 21, 2003 19:07
    Subject: alternative names for letterlike symbols(was..Re: Release of
    Unicode 4.0)

    >
    >
    > On Mon, 21 Apr 2003, Kenneth Whistler wrote:
    >
    > > Jungshik asked:
    > >
    > > > > implementation. The text of the book is currently in copy-edit, and
    will be
    > > > > on shelves in September 2003. Key sections of the book will be
    posted online
    > > > > as each becomes available.
    > > >
    > > > When keysections are available on-line, would they be final or
    > > > can they be subjected to change? Sometimes it's not machine readable
    > > > data but the text of the book that needs some feedback.
    > >
    > > From the point of view of feedback and review they are final.
    >
    > OK. I see, but I wish they were not because we haven't had a chance
    > to directly review them (other than those in UTRs for which we had
    > ample time to review and give feedbak)
    >
    >
    > > The book publication is now in "forthcoming" status. There is
    > > still editing going on, but it is copy editing being done by the
    > > publisher, not major technical review and content revision.
    >
    > Judging from your reply off-line about Hangul syllable boundaries,
    > I guess it's possible to move U+093E (Devanagari Vowel Sign AA) from
    > the various signs sub-block to the dependent vowel sign sub-block in
    > the codechart. In all other codecharts for Indic scripts, Vowel Sign
    > AA's at the corresponding positions (U+hh3E or U+hhBE) are in the
    dependent
    > vowel sub-block and I guess putting U+093E in the various signs sub-block
    > was not intended.
    >
    > In addition, in the annotation (canonical decomposition) for
    > U+0BCA, U+0BCB, and U+0BCC glyphs for U+0BC6, U+0BC7 and U+0BC6 (the
    > left part of two part vowel signs) in the chart for Tamil kinda bump
    > upon(overlap) the last digits to the left (6, 7, and 6) making them hard
    > to recognize.
    >
    > BTW, would it be still possible to change alternative names(NOT names)
    > for some characters in TUS 4.0? Maybe not. I should have reported these
    > earlier at least when 'bad names list' was compiled the other day or
    > when permille was talked about or even earlier when I wrote abuot U+2130
    > (in 2001?)
    >
    > 'gradient' (http://mathworld.wolfram.com/Gradient.html) is not listed
    > as an alternative name to U+2207 (NABLA) while the chart lists 'del' and
    > even Laplace operator (Laplacian/Laplacian operator) that is represented
    > not by U+2207 but by U+2207 followed by superscript 2. 'Laplace operator
    > (written with superscript 2)' has to to be 'informative note' rather
    > than an alternative name. 'gradient' has to take its place.
    >
    > U+210B(Script Capital H) is annotated with 'Hamiltonian function'
    > while U+2112(Script Capital L) is with 'Laplace
    > symbol'. Although some people refer to what most people simply
    > call 'Hamiltonian' as 'Hamiltonian function' (I wouldn't
    > believe this if google had not come up with a number of matches.
    > (http://scienceworld.wolfram.com/physics/Hamiltonian.html), it may have
    > been better to give more common alternative names 'Hamiltonian' or
    > 'Hamiltonian operator'. As for U+2112, Largrange wouldn't have liked the
    > fact that 'L' is exclusively attributed to Laplace by Unicode when U+2112
    > is used for 'Largrangian' as widely as for 'Laplace transform'. Besides
    > U+2131 (Script Capital F) has an alternative name 'Fourier transform' so
    > that I think it is more consistent to do the same withU+2112 with by
    > giving an alternative name 'Laplace transform' in addition to
    'Largrangian'
    > I'm proposing.
    >
    > U+212F may as well have a second alternative 'natural exponent'.
    >
    > Finally, a bunch of 'Squared Latin Abbreviations' (U+3380 -
    > U+33DD, U+3371 - U+3376) may need better alternative names (or
    > informational notes) than they have have now because their names
    > (e.g. Square NA for nano ampere) are not so descriptive [1] as names of
    > characters of a similar nature, U+2120 (Service Mark), U+2120 (Telephone
    > Sign), and U+2122(Trade Mark Sign). Of course, this is not necessary
    > if they were given obscure names and no alternative names/informational
    > note on purpose to discourage their use because they can be just easily
    > replaced by sequences of Latin/Greek letters and are included only
    > for the sake of compatibility with CJK standards.
    >
    > Jungshik
    >
    > [1] U+3380 is named 'SQUARE PA AMPS' whereas other characters
    > in the series of 'amperes' are just named 'SQUARE NA', 'SQUARE MU A',
    > 'SQUARE MA', and 'SQUARE KA'. U+3380 is 'pA' (pico ampere) and not
    > for 'PA Amp'. These square characters may not be at the top
    > of the list of characters with bad names, but belong to it.
    >
    >
    >



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Apr 21 2003 - 23:45:06 EDT