Discussion:
Punctuation symbols for partial cuneiform characters
Paul James Cowie
2003-09-03 07:11:39 UTC
Permalink
I wonder if anyone can help me track down two punctuation symbols in
Unicode? - I've been through the charts and, try as I might, I can't
seem to locate them....

They are used in the transliteration of cuneiform for partially
preserved signs and look like the very top portions, respectively, of
the parentheses marks : [ and ]

I'm hoping that they are supported in Unicode, as they are used
frequently in Assyriological literature.

All help greatly appreciated,


------------

Paul James Cowie

London, UK and Sydney, Australia

Editor, http://www.ancientneareast.net/
Area Supervisor, Tel Rehov Excavations, Israel
Committee Member, Friends of the Petrie Museum of Egyptian Archaeology

PhD Candidate, Department of Ancient History and Archaeology, Macquarie
University, Sydney, Australia



------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
KnowledgeStorm has over 22,000 B2B technology solutions. The most comprehensive IT buyers' information available. Research, compare, decide. E-Commerce | Application Dev | Accounting-Finance | Healthcare | Project Mgt | Sales-Marketing | More
http://us.click.yahoo.com/IMai8D/UYQGAA/cIoLAA/8FfwlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: unicode-***@yahooGroups.com

This mailing list is just an archive. The instructions to join the true Unicode List are on http://www.unicode.org/unicode/consortium/distlist.html


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Michael Everson
2003-09-03 09:45:45 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul James Cowie
I wonder if anyone can help me track down two punctuation symbols in
Unicode? - I've been through the charts and, try as I might, I can't
seem to locate them....
They are used in the transliteration of cuneiform for partially
preserved signs and look like the very top portions, respectively,
of the parentheses marks : [ and ]
I'm hoping that they are supported in Unicode, as they are used
frequently in Assyriological literature.
These half brackets are not yet encoded. The CEILING characters could
be used by some (and are recommended by some for this purpose) but in
my experience neither cuneiformists nor medievalists have accepted
the CEILING characters. A proposal for medieval Nordic characters
will contain these.
--
Michael Everson * * Everson Typography * * http://www.evertype.com


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
KnowledgeStorm has over 22,000 B2B technology solutions. The most comprehensive IT buyers' information available. Research, compare, decide. E-Commerce | Application Dev | Accounting-Finance | Healthcare | Project Mgt | Sales-Marketing | More
http://us.click.yahoo.com/IMai8D/UYQGAA/cIoLAA/8FfwlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: unicode-***@yahooGroups.com

This mailing list is just an archive. The instructions to join the true Unicode List are on http://www.unicode.org/unicode/consortium/distlist.html


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Peter Kirk
2003-09-03 11:11:36 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael Everson
Post by Paul James Cowie
I wonder if anyone can help me track down two punctuation symbols in
Unicode? - I've been through the charts and, try as I might, I can't
seem to locate them....
They are used in the transliteration of cuneiform for partially
preserved signs and look like the very top portions, respectively, of
the parentheses marks : [ and ]
I'm hoping that they are supported in Unicode, as they are used
frequently in Assyriological literature.
These half brackets are not yet encoded. The CEILING characters could
be used by some (and are recommended by some for this purpose) but in
my experience neither cuneiformists nor medievalists have accepted the
CEILING characters. A proposal for medieval Nordic characters will
contain these.
What's the problem with these CEILING characters? They are recommended
not just "by some" but by the Unicode standard for "general-purpose
corner brackets". Do cuneiformists and medievalists really need
significantly different glyph shapes or properties? Do they just not
like the glyphs in existing fonts? Or is this a case of the "not
invented here" syndrome? We really can't start adding to Unicode
separate sets of visually identical punctuation characters for each
academic discipline. Are we next going to get proposals for separate
full stops and commas for Egyptology, for cuneiform transliteration, and
for medieval Nordic? Where does this stop?
--
Peter Kirk
***@qaya.org (personal)
***@qaya.org (work)
http://www.qaya.org/




------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
KnowledgeStorm has over 22,000 B2B technology solutions. The most comprehensive IT buyers' information available. Research, compare, decide. E-Commerce | Application Dev | Accounting-Finance | Healthcare | Project Mgt | Sales-Marketing | More
http://us.click.yahoo.com/IMai8D/UYQGAA/cIoLAA/8FfwlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: unicode-***@yahooGroups.com

This mailing list is just an archive. The instructions to join the true Unicode List are on http://www.unicode.org/unicode/consortium/distlist.html


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Michael Everson
2003-09-03 12:06:25 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Kirk
What's the problem with these CEILING characters? They are
recommended not just "by some" but by the Unicode standard for
"general-purpose corner brackets". Do cuneiformists and medievalists
really need significantly different glyph shapes or properties? Do
they just not like the glyphs in existing fonts? Or is this a case
of the "not invented here" syndrome?
I don't know what these floor and ceiling things are. I don't
recognize them as "half square brackets" and neither do the
specialists. Are these supposed to be half square brackets? Why
weren't they encoded as punctuation? Why don't they have names that
reflect that in any way?

Right square bracket has a general category of Ps.
Right parenthesis has a general category of Ps
Right ceiling has a general category of Sm

I report only that I have been to two unrelated meetings where the
specialists complained that their punctuation characters were not
encoded.
Post by Peter Kirk
We really can't start adding to Unicode separate sets of visually
identical punctuation characters for each academic discipline. Are
we next going to get proposals for separate full stops and commas
for Egyptology, for cuneiform transliteration, and for medieval
Nordic?
Of course not. Though there will be things you doubtless dislike.
Post by Peter Kirk
Where does this stop?
It stops when the overunifications are quashed, I guess. The work is
slow, but we prevail. Vide Yogh, Coptic, Nuskhuri.
--
Michael Everson * * Everson Typography * * http://www.evertype.com


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
KnowledgeStorm has over 22,000 B2B technology solutions. The most comprehensive IT buyers' information available. Research, compare, decide. E-Commerce | Application Dev | Accounting-Finance | Healthcare | Project Mgt | Sales-Marketing | More
http://us.click.yahoo.com/IMai8D/UYQGAA/cIoLAA/8FfwlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: unicode-***@yahooGroups.com

This mailing list is just an archive. The instructions to join the true Unicode List are on http://www.unicode.org/unicode/consortium/distlist.html


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Peter Kirk
2003-09-03 13:52:51 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael Everson
I don't know what these floor and ceiling things are. I don't
recognize them as "half square brackets" and neither do the
specialists. Are these supposed to be half square brackets? ...
Well, apparently so, from reading the Unicode 4.0 code charts. Maybe we
need to disunify in a later version, but that's what the standard is for
now.
Post by Michael Everson
... Why weren't they encoded as punctuation? Why don't they have names
that reflect that in any way?
There are plenty of other misnamed characters. :-(
Post by Michael Everson
Right square bracket has a general category of Ps.
Right parenthesis has a general category of Ps
Right ceiling has a general category of Sm
Looks like an inconsistency which can be resolved in two ways:
1) Add new punctuation characters and leave these ones as symbols;
2) Adjust the categories of these ones to Ps.

And what about bidi mirroring?
--
Peter Kirk
***@qaya.org (personal)
***@qaya.org (work)
http://www.qaya.org/




------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
KnowledgeStorm has over 22,000 B2B technology solutions. The most comprehensive IT buyers' information available. Research, compare, decide. E-Commerce | Application Dev | Accounting-Finance | Healthcare | Project Mgt | Sales-Marketing | More
http://us.click.yahoo.com/IMai8D/UYQGAA/cIoLAA/8FfwlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: unicode-***@yahooGroups.com

This mailing list is just an archive. The instructions to join the true Unicode List are on http://www.unicode.org/unicode/consortium/distlist.html


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Michael Everson
2003-09-03 15:14:12 UTC
Permalink
Post by Peter Kirk
Post by Michael Everson
I don't know what these floor and ceiling things are. I don't
recognize them as "half square brackets" and neither do the
specialists. Are these supposed to be half square brackets? ...
Well, apparently so, from reading the Unicode 4.0 code charts. Maybe
we need to disunify in a later version, but that's what the standard
is for now.
Don't worry. The scholars aren't using them anyway so there won't be
any disunification cost.
Post by Peter Kirk
... Why weren't they encoded as punctuation? Why don't they have
names that reflect that in any way?
There are plenty of other misnamed characters. :-(
Ah, but one of my minions (laughs hysterically) has pointed out the
Post by Peter Kirk
The CEILING brackets are (most commonly) used to denote the ceiling
function in math. The FLOOR brackets are similarly (most commonly)
used to denote the floor function in math.
Look at the bottom half of page 4 (the one numbered 4, not counting
the pages before 1...) of
http://www.chl.chalmers.se/~kentk/LIA/lia2-draft-ed2.pdf.
This is conventional mathematical usage.
They are used predominantly in math expressions.
Hence, these characters have perfectly correct names for their
function. And they are completely different from the half-brackets.
The floor and ceiling characters are the same height as a square
bracket just without one of the feet.
Post by Peter Kirk
The name police didn't know what they were? ;-)
The Name Police don't know anything whatsoever about mathematics as
ye well know. (Floor and ceiling function indeed. I suppose there is
an attic and basement function, and a tornado-storm-cellar function?)
Post by Peter Kirk
Post by Michael Everson
Right square bracket has a general category of Ps.
Right parenthesis has a general category of Ps
Right ceiling has a general category of Sm
1) Add new punctuation characters and leave these ones as symbols;
Yes!
Post by Peter Kirk
2) Adjust the categories of these ones to Ps.
No!
Post by Peter Kirk
And what about bidi mirroring?
These should function just like the square brackets.
--
Michael Everson * * Everson Typography * * http://www.evertype.com


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
KnowledgeStorm has over 22,000 B2B technology solutions. The most comprehensive IT buyers' information available. Research, compare, decide. E-Commerce | Application Dev | Accounting-Finance | Healthcare | Project Mgt | Sales-Marketing | More
http://us.click.yahoo.com/IMai8D/UYQGAA/cIoLAA/8FfwlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: unicode-***@yahooGroups.com

This mailing list is just an archive. The instructions to join the true Unicode List are on http://www.unicode.org/unicode/consortium/distlist.html


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Peter Kirk
2003-09-03 17:11:11 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael Everson
Post by Peter Kirk
Post by Michael Everson
I don't know what these floor and ceiling things are. I don't
recognize them as "half square brackets" and neither do the
specialists. Are these supposed to be half square brackets? ...
Well, apparently so, from reading the Unicode 4.0 code charts. Maybe
we need to disunify in a later version, but that's what the standard
is for now.
Don't worry. The scholars aren't using them anyway so there won't be
any disunification cost.
Post by Peter Kirk
... Why weren't they encoded as punctuation? Why don't they have
names that reflect that in any way?
There are plenty of other misnamed characters. :-(
Ah, but one of my minions (laughs hysterically) has pointed out the
Post by Peter Kirk
The CEILING brackets are (most commonly) used to denote the ceiling
function in math. The FLOOR brackets are similarly (most commonly)
used to denote the floor function in math.
Look at the bottom half of page 4 (the one numbered 4, not counting
the pages before 1...) of
http://www.chl.chalmers.se/~kentk/LIA/lia2-draft-ed2.pdf.
This is conventional mathematical usage.
They are used predominantly in math expressions.
Hence, these characters have perfectly correct names for their
function. And they are completely different from the half-brackets.
The floor and ceiling characters are the same height as a square
bracket just without one of the feet.
Post by Peter Kirk
The name police didn't know what they were? ;-)
The Name Police don't know anything whatsoever about mathematics as ye
well know. (Floor and ceiling function indeed. I suppose there is an
attic and basement function, and a tornado-storm-cellar function?)
Post by Peter Kirk
Post by Michael Everson
Right square bracket has a general category of Ps.
Right parenthesis has a general category of Ps
Right ceiling has a general category of Sm
1) Add new punctuation characters and leave these ones as symbols;
Yes!
Post by Peter Kirk
2) Adjust the categories of these ones to Ps.
No!
Post by Peter Kirk
And what about bidi mirroring?
These should function just like the square brackets.
OK, I think I agree with you now. But this change needs to be
implemented quickly before the scholars do start using them. For each
scholar like Paul who asks this list before using the characters, there
may be many who read the standard and start doing what it tells them to
do, even if they don't much like the glyphs. In fact it is probably
already too late as that note has been printed in thousands of copies of
Unicode 4.0.0 and even it gets reversed in 4.0.1 people will continue to
find it in the printed book and follow it.
--
Peter Kirk
***@qaya.org (personal)
***@qaya.org (work)
http://www.qaya.org/




------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
KnowledgeStorm has over 22,000 B2B technology solutions. The most comprehensive IT buyers' information available. Research, compare, decide. E-Commerce | Application Dev | Accounting-Finance | Healthcare | Project Mgt | Sales-Marketing | More
http://us.click.yahoo.com/IMai8D/UYQGAA/cIoLAA/8FfwlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: unicode-***@yahooGroups.com

This mailing list is just an archive. The instructions to join the true Unicode List are on http://www.unicode.org/unicode/consortium/distlist.html


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
John Cowan
2003-09-03 19:02:32 UTC
Permalink
Post by Michael Everson
Hence, these characters have perfectly correct names for their
function. And they are completely different from the half-brackets.
The floor and ceiling characters are the same height as a square
bracket just without one of the feet.
Correct.
Post by Michael Everson
Post by Peter Kirk
The name police didn't know what they were? ;-)
The Name Police don't know anything whatsoever about mathematics as
ye well know. (Floor and ceiling function indeed. I suppose there is
an attic and basement function, and a tornado-storm-cellar function?)
No, indeed. Even the hopeless innumerate should be able to grasp
the ceiling and floor functions, however: the floor of four and a half
is four, whereas its ceiling is five. Some speak of rounding down and
rounding up respectively.
--
John Cowan ***@reutershealth.com www.ccil.org/~cowan www.reutershealth.com
"The competent programmer is fully aware of the strictly limited size of his own
skull; therefore he approaches the programming task in full humility, and among
other things he avoids clever tricks like the plague." --Edsger Dijkstra


------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
KnowledgeStorm has over 22,000 B2B technology solutions. The most comprehensive IT buyers' information available. Research, compare, decide. E-Commerce | Application Dev | Accounting-Finance | Healthcare | Project Mgt | Sales-Marketing | More
http://us.click.yahoo.com/IMai8D/UYQGAA/cIoLAA/8FfwlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: unicode-***@yahooGroups.com

This mailing list is just an archive. The instructions to join the true Unicode List are on http://www.unicode.org/unicode/consortium/distlist.html


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
t***@perdix.demon.co.uk
2003-09-03 20:17:44 UTC
Permalink
Post by John Cowan
No, indeed. Even the hopeless innumerate should be able to grasp
the ceiling and floor functions, however: the floor of four and a half
is four, whereas its ceiling is five. Some speak of rounding down and
rounding up respectively.
The hopelessly innumerate might get confused with minus four and a half. The
floor is minus five and the ceiling is minus four. (The floor goes towards
minus infinity not zero.)

Tim
--
Tim Partridge. Any opinions expressed are mine only and not those of my employer



------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
KnowledgeStorm has over 22,000 B2B technology solutions. The most comprehensive IT buyers' information available. Research, compare, decide. E-Commerce | Application Dev | Accounting-Finance | Healthcare | Project Mgt | Sales-Marketing | More
http://us.click.yahoo.com/IMai8D/UYQGAA/cIoLAA/8FfwlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: unicode-***@yahooGroups.com

This mailing list is just an archive. The instructions to join the true Unicode List are on http://www.unicode.org/unicode/consortium/distlist.html


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Peter Kirk
2003-09-03 09:43:42 UTC
Permalink
Post by Paul James Cowie
I wonder if anyone can help me track down two punctuation symbols in
Unicode? - I've been through the charts and, try as I might, I can't
seem to locate them....
They are used in the transliteration of cuneiform for partially
preserved signs and look like the very top portions, respectively, of
the parentheses marks : [ and ]
I'm hoping that they are supported in Unicode, as they are used
frequently in Assyriological literature.
All help greatly appreciated,
Try U+2308 and U+2309.
--
Peter Kirk
***@qaya.org (personal)
***@qaya.org (work)
http://www.qaya.org/





------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
KnowledgeStorm has over 22,000 B2B technology solutions. The most comprehensive IT buyers' information available. Research, compare, decide. E-Commerce | Application Dev | Accounting-Finance | Healthcare | Project Mgt | Sales-Marketing | More
http://us.click.yahoo.com/IMai8D/UYQGAA/cIoLAA/8FfwlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: unicode-***@yahooGroups.com

This mailing list is just an archive. The instructions to join the true Unicode List are on http://www.unicode.org/unicode/consortium/distlist.html


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Kenneth Whistler
2003-09-03 18:32:02 UTC
Permalink
Well, since Michael is engaged in an all-guns-blazing campaign
on the public list, I guess I need to weigh in, too.
Post by Peter Kirk
Post by Michael Everson
Don't worry. The scholars aren't using them anyway so there won't be
any disunification cost.
TBD.
Post by Peter Kirk
Post by Michael Everson
Ah, but one of my minions (laughs hysterically) has pointed out the
Post by Peter Kirk
The CEILING brackets are (most commonly) used to denote the ceiling
function in math. The FLOOR brackets are similarly (most commonly)
used to denote the floor function in math.
Look at the bottom half of page 4 (the one numbered 4, not counting
the pages before 1...) of
http://www.chl.chalmers.se/~kentk/LIA/lia2-draft-ed2.pdf.
This is conventional mathematical usage.
They are used predominantly in math expressions.
If Michael (admittedly math-averse) would bother to look at the
mathematical source document (ISO/IEC 10967-2, Language indepedent
arithmetic) he cites here from Kent Karlsson, he
would discover that in math the floor and ceiling characters *are*
used in bracketing pairs.
Post by Peter Kirk
Post by Michael Everson
Post by Peter Kirk
1) Add new punctuation characters and leave these ones as symbols;
Yes!
This assumes the two categories are mutually exclusive. Formally,
they are, of course, since the General Category is a partition,
so that if a character has gc=Sm (or gc=So, or anything else), it
can't also have gc=Po (or gc=Ps, or anything else). But in
practice the line between actual usage of symbols and punctuation
is quite fuzzy. There are plenty of symbols (including some
dingbats) that are used as punctuation in various contexts. And
in this particular case, the usage of floor and ceiling symbols
in math does not prevent recognizing that their usage *even in
math* as bracketing pairs on symbols is delimiter- and punctuation-like
in practice.
Post by Peter Kirk
Post by Michael Everson
Post by Peter Kirk
2) Adjust the categories of these ones to Ps.
No!
I concur that the General Category assignment does not need
fiddling with. But in point of fact, assignment of gc=Sm is
insufficient in actual applications to define details of usage
and layout.

One should not draw too many conclusions from the details of the
preferred glyph shape of floor and ceiling in mathematical
expressions (taller than Michael wants for corner brackets in
medieval manuscript textual critical apparatus). Note that even
the *regular* square brackets, U+005B/U+005D, have distinct layout
behavior when they occur in mathematical expressions. That is
insufficient reason to then go insisting that those need to
be separately encoded as *characters*.
Post by Peter Kirk
Post by Michael Everson
Post by Peter Kirk
And what about bidi mirroring?
These should function just like the square brackets.
They do. On this item, Michael knows not whereof he speaks:

005B;LEFT SQUARE BRACKET;Ps;0;ON;;;;;Y;OPENING SQUARE BRACKET;;;;
^^ ^

2308;LEFT CEILING;Sm;0;ON;;;;;Y;;;;;
^^ ^

Both of these are bd=ON (other neutral) and bidi-mirrored=Y. They
behave identically in terms of bidi.

The only difference is: General Category Ps versus Sm, which I addressed
above. Application behavior for these is not going to be automatically
determined by the Ps/Pe assignments, since not all bracketing pairs
of characters have those property assignments.
Post by Peter Kirk
OK, I think I agree with you now. But this change needs to be
implemented quickly before the scholars do start using them. For each
scholar like Paul who asks this list before using the characters, there
may be many who read the standard and start doing what it tells them to
do, even if they don't much like the glyphs.
TUS 4.0, p. 413:

"Character images shown in the code charts are not prescriptive.
In actual fonts, considerable variations are to be expected."

TUS 4.0, p. 414:

"Designers of high-quality fonts will do their own research into the
preferred glyphic appearance of Unicode characters. ...

"Many characters have been unified and have different appearances
in different language contexts. ..."

The latter note can easily be extrapolated to recognizing that the
use of left/right floor/ceiling as bracket pairs in mathematics and the
use of left/right ceiling as (corner) bracket pairs in medieval
textual apparatus represent sufficiently different contexts that
it is not unreasonable to expect "designers of high-quality fonts"
to depict them with appropriately distinct appearances.

Remember, folks, that Unicode is a *plain text* standard. Unless
medievalists have some pretty compelling reason for *distinguishing*
in their documents mathematical floor/ceiling notation from
their textual conventions of corner bracketing, there really
is nothing standing in the way of using the characters as
recommended in the standard, except for an aversion to the specific
design of the glyphs in the most widely available Unicode generic
fonts.
Post by Peter Kirk
In fact it is probably
already too late as that note has been printed in thousands of copies of
Unicode 4.0.0 and even it gets reversed in 4.0.1 people will continue to
find it in the printed book and follow it.
Corner brackets have been discussed on this and other lists
on numbers of occasions before. The text in TUS 4.0 was added
to guide people to the characters most likely to be appropriate
for general corner bracket usage, since there are so many
other possible choices already in the standard. (Note the newly
added confusables: 23A1/23A4 and 23BE/23CB, as well as the
old standbys: 231C/231F, 250C/2510, and 300C/300D.)

Michael may well succeed in a campaign to convince the UTC and
WG2 to encode yet *another* set of corner-shaped characters
as his preferred corner brackets to recommend to medievalists
(or others). But his claim that there won't be any disunification
cost is wrong, IMO.

--Ken

=============================================================

Please note that for the duration of the Sobig.F worm, the
email address "***@sybase.com" is being blackholed. If you
wish to contact me by email, please use:
ken.whistler @ sybase.com



------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
KnowledgeStorm has over 22,000 B2B technology solutions. The most comprehensive IT buyers' information available. Research, compare, decide. E-Commerce | Application Dev | Accounting-Finance | Healthcare | Project Mgt | Sales-Marketing | More
http://us.click.yahoo.com/IMai8D/UYQGAA/cIoLAA/8FfwlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: unicode-***@yahooGroups.com

This mailing list is just an archive. The instructions to join the true Unicode List are on http://www.unicode.org/unicode/consortium/distlist.html


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Peter Kirk
2003-09-03 20:22:08 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kenneth Whistler
Well, since Michael is engaged in an all-guns-blazing campaign
on the public list, I guess I need to weigh in, too.
...
Corner brackets have been discussed on this and other lists
on numbers of occasions before. The text in TUS 4.0 was added
to guide people to the characters most likely to be appropriate
for general corner bracket usage, since there are so many
other possible choices already in the standard. (Note the newly
added confusables: 23A1/23A4 and 23BE/23CB, as well as the
old standbys: 231C/231F, 250C/2510, and 300C/300D.)
And then there's the even newer 2E00.
Post by Kenneth Whistler
Michael may well succeed in a campaign to convince the UTC and
WG2 to encode yet *another* set of corner-shaped characters
as his preferred corner brackets to recommend to medievalists
(or others). But his claim that there won't be any disunification
cost is wrong, IMO.
--Ken
Thanks for bringing a balance to this discussion.
--
Peter Kirk
***@qaya.org (personal)
***@qaya.org (work)
http://www.qaya.org/




------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
KnowledgeStorm has over 22,000 B2B technology solutions. The most comprehensive IT buyers' information available. Research, compare, decide. E-Commerce | Application Dev | Accounting-Finance | Healthcare | Project Mgt | Sales-Marketing | More
http://us.click.yahoo.com/IMai8D/UYQGAA/cIoLAA/8FfwlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: unicode-***@yahooGroups.com

This mailing list is just an archive. The instructions to join the true Unicode List are on http://www.unicode.org/unicode/consortium/distlist.html


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Philippe Verdy
2003-09-04 07:53:28 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kenneth Whistler
"Character images shown in the code charts are not prescriptive.
In actual fonts, considerable variations are to be expected."
"Designers of high-quality fonts will do their own research into the
preferred glyphic appearance of Unicode characters. ...
"Many characters have been unified and have different appearances
in different language contexts. ..."
The latter note can easily be extrapolated to recognizing that the
use of left/right floor/ceiling as bracket pairs in mathematics and the
use of left/right ceiling as (corner) bracket pairs in medieval
textual apparatus represent sufficiently different contexts that
it is not unreasonable to expect "designers of high-quality fonts"
to depict them with appropriately distinct appearances.
I also concur to support the fact that the CEILING brackets, even if
they
were initially introduced to support mathematical symbols, can be used
as regular punctuation, for the same reasons that square brackets are
defined as punctuations and also used as mathematical symbols.

For the case of medieval texts, the change of appearance of these
symbols (with shorter legs), just needs to be considered as a font
variant, which would be in sync with the change of appearance of
glyphs for letters in the mediaval text.

If someone reproduces the mediaval text with (say) a "Arial Unicode"
font, that will display long legs for ceiling brackets, it won't be
wrong
given that the narrow sans-serif style was actually never used for
letters in medieval text.

If one wants to have exact forms for these corner punctuation, one
would need to select another font for the text, that would also
include the short-leg glyphs for corner punctuations, simply encoded
with the existing mathematical symbols.

This will work correctly given the existing mirroring and Bidi
properties
of these CEILING mathematical symbols, that behave exactly like the
square brackets, independantly of their current general category
as symbols or punctuations...



------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
KnowledgeStorm has over 22,000 B2B technology solutions. The most comprehensive IT buyers' information available. Research, compare, decide. E-Commerce | Application Dev | Accounting-Finance | Healthcare | Project Mgt | Sales-Marketing | More
http://us.click.yahoo.com/IMai8D/UYQGAA/cIoLAA/8FfwlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: unicode-***@yahooGroups.com

This mailing list is just an archive. The instructions to join the true Unicode List are on http://www.unicode.org/unicode/consortium/distlist.html


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Jim Allan
2003-09-03 21:37:05 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kenneth Whistler
And
in this particular case, the usage of floor and ceiling symbols
in math does not prevent recognizing that their usage *even in
math* as bracketing pairs on symbols is delimiter- and punctuation-like
in practice.
One may note the common use of the greater-than and less-than signs as
angle brackets in many publications including the Unicode standard. I
don't think that necessitates coding separate characters.
Post by Kenneth Whistler
Remember, folks, that Unicode is a *plain text* standard. Unless
medievalists have some pretty compelling reason for *distinguishing*
in their documents mathematical floor/ceiling notation from
their textual conventions of corner bracketing, there really
is nothing standing in the way of using the characters as
recommended in the standard, except for an aversion to the specific
design of the glyphs in the most widely available Unicode generic
fonts.
But the half square brackets to me fall into a different category.

I am familiar with then from numerous published texts. They are indeed
widely used to indicate editorial insertion guesses for missing or
undecipherable material and I have never seen them look like anything
but the top *halves* of normal square brackets.

The ceiling characters as shown in the standard and in Kent Karlson's
paper don't fit in appearance. Of course medievalists and editors of
ancient middle-eastern texts will "have an aversion to the specific
design of the glyphs" since the design is wrong for half square brackets.

If I were editing texts using that convention and wished to stick to
Unicode I'd probably superscript U+23A1 LEFT SQUARE BRACKET UPPER CORNER
and U+23A4 RIGHT SQUARE BRACKET UPPER CORNER as the closest
approximation, kludge though that would be.

Left ceiling and right ceiling might do in plain text as a reasonable
reminder of the characters that should be used. Or 231C TOP LEFT CORNER
and 231B TOP RIGHT CORNER. But it would be like using the digit 3 for
yogh or ezh or Egyptian glottal stop. It works well enough to get the
meaning across, but it isn't the right character.

I'm not at all sure what "general-purpose corner brackets" are.

Jim Allan










------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
KnowledgeStorm has over 22,000 B2B technology solutions. The most comprehensive IT buyers' information available. Research, compare, decide. E-Commerce | Application Dev | Accounting-Finance | Healthcare | Project Mgt | Sales-Marketing | More
http://us.click.yahoo.com/IMai8D/UYQGAA/cIoLAA/8FfwlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: unicode-***@yahooGroups.com

This mailing list is just an archive. The instructions to join the true Unicode List are on http://www.unicode.org/unicode/consortium/distlist.html


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Kent Karlsson
2003-09-04 12:05:24 UTC
Permalink
Jim Allan wrote:
...
Post by Jim Allan
One may note the common use of the greater-than and less-than signs as
angle brackets in many publications
Just because < and > are in ASCII, the have been used as approximations.
Post by Jim Allan
including the Unicode standard. I
don't think that necessitates coding separate characters.
Yes, it does:
27E8;MATHEMATICAL LEFT ANGLE BRACKET;Ps;0;ON;;;;;Y;;;;;
27E9;MATHEMATICAL RIGHT ANGLE BRACKET;Pe;0;ON;;;;;Y;;;;;

(Despite the name, you can use them outside of math expressions.)

You also have the (mathematical):
2991;LEFT ANGLE BRACKET WITH DOT;Ps;0;ON;;;;;Y;;;;;
2992;RIGHT ANGLE BRACKET WITH DOT;Pe;0;ON;;;;;Y;;;;;

But:
3008;LEFT ANGLE BRACKET;Ps;0;ON;;;;;Y;OPENING ANGLE BRACKET;;;;
3009;RIGHT ANGLE BRACKET;Pe;0;ON;;;;;Y;CLOSING ANGLE BRACKET;;;;
are for CJK use.

/kent k



------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
KnowledgeStorm has over 22,000 B2B technology solutions. The most comprehensive IT buyers' information available. Research, compare, decide. E-Commerce | Application Dev | Accounting-Finance | Healthcare | Project Mgt | Sales-Marketing | More
http://us.click.yahoo.com/IMai8D/UYQGAA/cIoLAA/8FfwlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: unicode-***@yahooGroups.com

This mailing list is just an archive. The instructions to join the true Unicode List are on http://www.unicode.org/unicode/consortium/distlist.html


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Jim Allan
2003-09-04 14:09:54 UTC
Permalink
Post by Philippe Verdy
For the case of medieval texts, the change of appearance of these
symbols (with shorter legs), just needs to be considered as a font
variant, which would be in sync with the change of appearance of
glyphs for letters in the mediaval text.
If someone reproduces the mediaval text with (say) a "Arial Unicode"
font, that will display long legs for ceiling brackets, it won't be
wrong
given that the narrow sans-serif style was actually never used for
letters in medieval text.
Medieval texts and transliterations of cuneiform text are almost always
printed using modern fonts in modern style.

The original appearance of the text is not an issue (especially with
cuneiform). The text is represented in a modern font.

Regular square brackets are used to enclose editorial commentary. The
upper-half square brackets are often used to enclose editorial surmised
replacement of text missing because of damage to the original. This may
be a single character or several lines of text (which one may be able to
fill in approximately from another manuscript or tablet containing
approximately the same text).

They are sometimes used again in translations of such texts.

Using similar characters for the upper-half square brackets would be as
tyopgraphically abnormal as using << and >> or “ and ” instead of « and
» for quotation marks in French.

Neither is *wrong* if the proper characters are not available or someone
who knows the typographical issues decides purposely to substitute other
characters.

As far as I can tell the ceiling brackets and the upper-half square
brackets were created separately for different disciplines. They also
have different meanings.

Characters of different origin, different meaning and different
appearance are not usually considered to be style variants that should
be selected by changing a font.

Jim Allan










------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
KnowledgeStorm has over 22,000 B2B technology solutions. The most comprehensive IT buyers' information available. Research, compare, decide. E-Commerce | Application Dev | Accounting-Finance | Healthcare | Project Mgt | Sales-Marketing | More
http://us.click.yahoo.com/IMai8D/UYQGAA/cIoLAA/8FfwlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: unicode-***@yahooGroups.com

This mailing list is just an archive. The instructions to join the true Unicode List are on http://www.unicode.org/unicode/consortium/distlist.html


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Jim Allan
2003-09-04 15:58:43 UTC
Permalink
Post by Kent Karlsson
...
Post by Jim Allan
One may note the common use of the greater-than and less-than signs as
angle brackets in many publications
Just because < and > are in ASCII, the have been used as approximations.
That was the origin of this practice.

However the practice is found now in professional technical publishing
as a matter of choice, for example in modern linguistics and in
Backus-Naur notation where the more normal angle brackets are certainly
available for use.
Post by Kent Karlsson
Post by Jim Allan
including the Unicode standard. I
don't think that necessitates coding separate characters.
27E8;MATHEMATICAL LEFT ANGLE BRACKET;Ps;0;ON;;;;;Y;;;;;
27E9;MATHEMATICAL RIGHT ANGLE BRACKET;Pe;0;ON;;;;;Y;;;;;
(Despite the name, you can use them outside of math expressions.)
2991;LEFT ANGLE BRACKET WITH DOT;Ps;0;ON;;;;;Y;;;;;
2992;RIGHT ANGLE BRACKET WITH DOT;Pe;0;ON;;;;;Y;;;;;
3008;LEFT ANGLE BRACKET;Ps;0;ON;;;;;Y;OPENING ANGLE BRACKET;;;;
3009;RIGHT ANGLE BRACKET;Pe;0;ON;;;;;Y;CLOSING ANGLE BRACKET;;;;
are for CJK use.
I am quite aware that these are encoded. Angle brackets are also to be
found in the well known and widely available Adobe symbol character set
employed in various Symbol fonts and I have used them.

But the GREATER-THAN and LESS-THAN signs sometimes continue to be used
*by preference* for angle brackets even when angle bracket glyphs are
available.

For an example, from
http://www.unicode.org/versions/Unicode4.0.0/Preface.pdf under *Sequences*:

<< A sequence of two or more code points may be represented by a
comma-delimited list, set off by angle brackets. For this purpose angle
brackets consist of U+003C LESS-THAN-SIGN and U+003E GREATER-THAN-SIGN.
Spaces are optional after the comma, and U+ notation for the code point
is also optional—for example, “<U+0061, U+0300>”. >>

The common *deliberate* use of LESS-THAN and GREATER-THAN for angle
brackets does not require that clones be encoded in Unicode for that use.

Similarly the convention that I and some others use of sometimes
indicating quoted text in email or on forums by "<<" and ">>" does not
require any new encoding symbols in Unicode.

Symbol characers often have multiple and inconsistant usage without
ceasing to be the same characters.


Jim Allan







------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
KnowledgeStorm has over 22,000 B2B technology solutions. The most comprehensive IT buyers' information available. Research, compare, decide. E-Commerce | Application Dev | Accounting-Finance | Healthcare | Project Mgt | Sales-Marketing | More
http://us.click.yahoo.com/IMai8D/UYQGAA/cIoLAA/8FfwlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: unicode-***@yahooGroups.com

This mailing list is just an archive. The instructions to join the true Unicode List are on http://www.unicode.org/unicode/consortium/distlist.html


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Kent Karlsson
2003-09-04 19:24:13 UTC
Permalink
Post by Jim Allan
But the GREATER-THAN and LESS-THAN signs sometimes continue
to be used
*by preference* for angle brackets even when angle bracket glyphs are
available.
For an example, from
http://www.unicode.org/versions/Unicode4.0.0/Preface.pdf
<< A sequence of two or more code points may be represented by a
comma-delimited list, set off by angle brackets. For this
purpose angle
brackets consist of U+003C LESS-THAN-SIGN and U+003E
GREATER-THAN-SIGN.
Spaces are optional after the comma, and U+ notation for the
code point
is also optional—for example, “<U+0061, U+0300>”. >>
The common *deliberate* use of LESS-THAN and GREATER-THAN for angle
brackets does not require that clones be encoded in Unicode
for that use.
Of course not. The example you cite, as well as for similar examples,
e.g. XML/SGML (and their "applications"), and many others, < > are
used just BECAUSE they are in ASCII (and invariant in EBCDIC), and
these uses cannot assume that any non-ASCII (and/or, depending
on scope, non-EBCDIC) characters are at all directly representable.

Actually, the example you cite were in draft form using the angle
brackets, though no code points were referenced, but that was
changed for the reason I mention here). The reason is the same
for keeping English formal names of Unicode characters purely
in ASCII repertoire (intersected with the invariant EBCDIC
*repertoire*).
This is not maintained for the formal French names though...

/kent k



------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
KnowledgeStorm has over 22,000 B2B technology solutions. The most comprehensive IT buyers' information available. Research, compare, decide. E-Commerce | Application Dev | Accounting-Finance | Healthcare | Project Mgt | Sales-Marketing | More
http://us.click.yahoo.com/IMai8D/UYQGAA/cIoLAA/8FfwlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: unicode-***@yahooGroups.com

This mailing list is just an archive. The instructions to join the true Unicode List are on http://www.unicode.org/unicode/consortium/distlist.html


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Jim Allan
2003-09-05 14:37:27 UTC
Permalink
Kent Karlson wrote on my comments that *deliberate* use of LESS-THAN and
GREATER-THAN for angle brackes did not require that clones be encoded
Post by Kent Karlsson
Of course not. The example you cite, as well as for similar examples,
e.g. XML/SGML (and their "applications"), and many others, < > are
used just BECAUSE they are in ASCII (and invariant in EBCDIC), and
these uses cannot assume that any non-ASCII (and/or, depending
on scope, non-EBCDIC) characters are at all directly representable.
Actually, the example you cite were in draft form using the angle
brackets, though no code points were referenced, but that was
changed for the reason I mention here). The reason is the same
for keeping English formal names of Unicode characters purely
in ASCII repertoire (intersected with the invariant EBCDIC
*repertoire*).
This is not maintained for the formal French names though...
Yes. It is often desireable to portrary notations invented to be usable
within the ASCII character set with the same set of characters even when
presented in text where a larger set of characters are used.

What I find interesting is that glyphs that appear to be GREATER-THAN
and LESS-THAN are used for angle brackets in circumstances where keeping
the notation in a form that can be coded exactly in ASCII wouldn't
seem to be an issue.

In linguistics angle brackets have long been a standard method to
indicate grapheme representation as opposed to phonemic or phonetic
representation but I've noticed GREATER-THAN and LESS-THAN glyphs being
used instead of more traditional angle-bracket glyphs even in books and
articles which contain such a large number of special linguistic
characters that one would not expect typographical constraints to be an
issue.

An example in front of me is _Writing Systems: An introduction to their
linguistic analysis_ by Florian Coulmas, Cambridge: Cambridge University
Press, 2003.

For a past example, I also have _Altbabylonische Briefe in Umschrift und
Übersetzung_ edited by F. R. Kraus (Leiden, 1964) which is an edition of
transliterated Old Babylonian letters with German translation. Kraus
uses GREATER-THAN and LESS-THAN glyphs which he calls "spitzen Klammern"
to indicate characters which he has added to the text as probably
omitted in error by the original writer.

This use of such glyphs as angle brackets predates ASCII itself much
less the overloaded use of LESS-THAN and GRATER-THAN encouraged by their
presence in ASCII and basic EBCDIC (and scientific BCDIC).

Also characters which Kraus judges redundant are enclosed by what he
calls "doppelten spitzen Klammern" which are in form U+2AA1 DOUBLE
NESTED LESS-THAN and U+2AA2 DOUBLE NESTED GREATER-THAN.

Jim Allan











------------------------ Yahoo! Groups Sponsor ---------------------~-->
KnowledgeStorm has over 22,000 B2B technology solutions. The most comprehensive IT buyers' information available. Research, compare, decide. E-Commerce | Application Dev | Accounting-Finance | Healthcare | Project Mgt | Sales-Marketing | More
http://us.click.yahoo.com/IMai8D/UYQGAA/cIoLAA/8FfwlB/TM
---------------------------------------------------------------------~->

To Unsubscribe, send a blank message to: unicode-***@yahooGroups.com

This mailing list is just an archive. The instructions to join the true Unicode List are on http://www.unicode.org/unicode/consortium/distlist.html


Your use of Yahoo! Groups is subject to http://docs.yahoo.com/info/terms/
Continue reading on narkive:
Search results for 'Punctuation symbols for partial cuneiform characters' (Questions and Answers)
10
replies
First time for..?
started 2006-10-17 15:42:19 UTC
homework help
Loading...