From: Asmus Freytag (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Mon Jul 13 2009 - 19:34:17 CDT
On 7/13/2009 3:41 PM, Charlie Ruland wrote:
> ***** Original Message/原始郵件 *****
> From/寄件者: Leo Broukhis <email@example.com>
> Subject/主旨: Re: Gwoyeu Romatzyh marking the optional neutral tone
> To/收件者: Kenneth Whistler <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Date/日期: Mon Jul 13 2009 23:50:45 GMT+0200
>> On Mon, Jul 13, 2009 at 2:18 PM, Kenneth Whistler<email@example.com>
>>> In that case, Unicode has just what the doctor ordered:
>>> U+FF61 HALFWIDTH IDEOGRAPHIC FULL STOP
> I beg to differ. What we need is *proportional* ideographic full stop
> (neither full with nor half width, i.e. not monospaced/fixed width).
The characteristic of the two ideographic full stops is that they sit in
the left side of the character cell (at least that's a "typical" glyph
representation for them, even if variations occur). If that
one-sidedness is what you object to, then, in my view, you would indeed
need a new character.
>>> The main problem with insisting on etymological correctness,
>>> however, is that U+FF61 may not be as well-represented in
>>> general purpose fonts as some of the other choices.
>> There is also U+FFEE HALFWIDTH WHITE CIRCLE.
> Which is usually *above* the baseline and therefore doesn’t resemble
> the character we are looking for at all.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jul 13 2009 - 19:37:35 CDT