Talk:1726: Unicode - Revision history

42.book.addict at 21:28, 24 October 2024

2024-10-24T21:28:09Z

162.158.62.65 at 15:02, 25 August 2022

2022-08-25T15:02:41Z

172.68.50.221: 🦕 and 🦖 has been approved (5 years ago) \o/

2022-04-05T07:46:38Z

🦕 and 🦖 has been approved (5 years ago) \o/

Davidy22 at 03:55, 5 September 2016

2016-09-05T03:55:47Z

108.162.215.204: mistake in hyperlink; I'm the same person who added this comment

2016-09-02T04:51:30Z

mistake in hyperlink; I'm the same person who added this comment

108.162.249.162 at 04:23, 2 September 2016

2016-09-02T04:23:47Z

Davidy22 at 03:48, 2 September 2016

2016-09-02T03:48:26Z

141.101.98.19 at 01:21, 2 September 2016

2016-09-02T01:21:19Z

141.101.84.120 at 15:08, 1 September 2016

2016-09-01T15:08:44Z

108.162.229.49 at 20:45, 31 August 2016

2016-08-31T20:45:15Z

@@ Line 26: / Line 26: @@
 You don't need to go far as emoji to show how Unicode is doomed; the CJK(Chinese, Japanese, Korean) charsets, used in probably most developed countries outside of America/Europe, have had pretty tough time getting settled yet still have a few problems [[Special:Contributions/141.101.84.120|141.101.84.120]] 18:01, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
 :Can you elaborate or give a reference? Thanks [[Special:Contributions/108.162.229.49|108.162.229.49]] 20:45, 31 August 2016 (UTC) Sylvain M.
 :Okay. Since I'm a Korean, let me start with Hangul, which is used to write Korean language. The beauty of Hangul is that a complete letter is consisted of 2~3 'jamo's(consonants or vowels). The first one  is a consonant and called 'chosung', second one is a vowel and called 'joongsung', the last one's a consonant and called 'jongsung'. Possible numbers for each are 125, 95, 138. So total possible number of a letter is 1,638,750. But that's a theoretical number and actually frequently used letters are not that much. So in Unicode 1.0 there were 2,350 complete letters. However, it trimmed too much and was missing quite lots of letters. So 4,516 letters were added in Unicode 1.1. Unfortunately, this time the order of charset table was all messed up. You need a program to construct a letter from jamos and it was almost impossible to make a program that does consistent conversion. So in Unicode 2.0 these areas were totally scrapped, and 11,172 letters were allocated in a new area.
 :The Hangul charset was mostly settled there. The rest of 1,638,750 hangul letters that are rarely used are constructed by another method, writing three jamos in sequence. You might ask why we didn't use this method in the first place, that's because there would be too much overhead. We could have ended up using 4~6 byte per complete letter, instead of 2 byte per letter...
@@ Line 36: / Line 34: @@
 Also, it's possible people who like to argue over how Unicode should define things could get draw in? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.162|108.162.249.162]] 04:23, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
-I want to see the brontosaurus emoji with the vomiting modifier from comic 1813
+I want to see the brontosaurus emoji with the vomiting modifier from comic 1813 {{unsigned ip|162.158.62.65|15:02, 25 August 2022 (UTC)}}

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:02, 25 August 2022
Line 35:		Line 35:

	Also, it's possible people who like to argue over how Unicode should define things could get draw in? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.162\|108.162.249.162]] 04:23, 2 September 2016 (UTC)		Also, it's possible people who like to argue over how Unicode should define things could get draw in? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.162\|108.162.249.162]] 04:23, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
		+
		+	I want to see the brontosaurus emoji with the vomiting modifier from comic 1813

@@ Line 2: / Line 2: @@
 # Feedback by Andrew West - 13 dinosaurs: [http://www.unicode.org/L2/L2016/16103-jurassic-fdbk.pdf http://www.unicode.org/L2/L2016/16103-jurassic-fdbk.pdf]
 # Article by Becky Ferreira - they should have feathers: [http://motherboard.vice.com/read/dinosaur-emojis http://motherboard.vice.com/read/dinosaur-emojis]
 Sebastian [[Special:Contributions/162.158.83.168|162.158.83.168]] 12:14, 29 August 2016 (UTC)--

@@ Line 1: / Line 1: @@
 # Proposal by Courtney Milan - 3 dinosaurs: [http://unicode.org/L2/L2016/16072-jurassic-emoji.pdf http://unicode.org/L2/L2016/16072-jurassic-emoji.pdf]
 # Feedback by Andrew West - 13 dinosaurs: [http://www.unicode.org/L2/L2016/16103-jurassic-fdbk.pdf http://www.unicode.org/L2/L2016/16103-jurassic-fdbk.pdf]
@@ Line 33: / Line 31: @@
 would a brontosaurus have feathers?[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.19|141.101.98.19]] 01:21, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

@@ Line 30: / Line 30: @@
 :Okay. Since I'm a Korean, let me start with Hangul, which is used to write Korean language. The beauty of Hangul is that a complete letter is consisted of 2~3 'jamo's(consonants or vowels). The first one  is a consonant and called 'chosung', second one is a vowel and called 'joongsung', the last one's a consonant and called 'jongsung'. Possible numbers for each are 125, 95, 138. So total possible number of a letter is 1,638,750. But that's a theoretical number and actually frequently used letters are not that much. So in Unicode 1.0 there were 2,350 complete letters. However, it trimmed too much and was missing quite lots of letters. So 4,516 letters were added in Unicode 1.1. Unfortunately, this time the order of charset table was all messed up. You need a program to construct a letter from jamos and it was almost impossible to make a program that does consistent conversion. So in Unicode 2.0 these areas were totally scrapped, and 11,172 letters were allocated in a new area.
 :The Hangul charset was mostly settled there. The rest of 1,638,750 hangul letters that are rarely used are constructed by another method, writing three jamos in sequence. You might ask why we didn't use this method in the first place, that's because there would be too much overhead. We could have ended up using 4~6 byte per complete letter, instead of 2 byte per letter...
-:You can still find "CJK unified ideographs" [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unicode#Versions|keep being added even in recent Unicode versions]. Since these ideographs are used in so vast area and different countries, there are so many similar but different characters. AFAIK these are mostly needed in Japanese names. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.84.120|141.101.84.120]] 15:08, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
+:You can still find "CJK unified ideographs" [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unicode#Versions keep being added even in recent Unicode versions]. Since these ideographs are used in so vast area and different countries, there are so many similar but different characters. AFAIK these are mostly needed in Japanese names. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.84.120|141.101.84.120]] 15:08, 1 September 2016 (UTC)
 would a brontosaurus have feathers?[[Special:Contributions/141.101.98.19|141.101.98.19]] 01:21, 2 September 2016 (UTC)

← Older revision		Revision as of 04:23, 2 September 2016
Line 1:		Line 1:
		+	Also, it's possible people who like to argue over how Unicode should define things could get draw in? [[Special:Contributions/108.162.249.162\|108.162.249.162]] 04:23, 2 September 2016 (UTC)
		+
	# Proposal by Courtney Milan - 3 dinosaurs: [http://unicode.org/L2/L2016/16072-jurassic-emoji.pdf http://unicode.org/L2/L2016/16072-jurassic-emoji.pdf]		# Proposal by Courtney Milan - 3 dinosaurs: [http://unicode.org/L2/L2016/16072-jurassic-emoji.pdf http://unicode.org/L2/L2016/16072-jurassic-emoji.pdf]
	# Feedback by Andrew West - 13 dinosaurs: [http://www.unicode.org/L2/L2016/16103-jurassic-fdbk.pdf http://www.unicode.org/L2/L2016/16103-jurassic-fdbk.pdf]		# Feedback by Andrew West - 13 dinosaurs: [http://www.unicode.org/L2/L2016/16103-jurassic-fdbk.pdf http://www.unicode.org/L2/L2016/16103-jurassic-fdbk.pdf]

← Older revision		Revision as of 15:08, 1 September 2016
Line 24:		Line 24:
	You don't need to go far as emoji to show how Unicode is doomed; the CJK(Chinese, Japanese, Korean) charsets, used in probably most developed countries outside of America/Europe, have had pretty tough time getting settled yet still have a few problems [[Special:Contributions/141.101.84.120\|141.101.84.120]] 18:01, 31 August 2016 (UTC)		You don't need to go far as emoji to show how Unicode is doomed; the CJK(Chinese, Japanese, Korean) charsets, used in probably most developed countries outside of America/Europe, have had pretty tough time getting settled yet still have a few problems [[Special:Contributions/141.101.84.120\|141.101.84.120]] 18:01, 31 August 2016 (UTC)
	:Can you elaborate or give a reference? Thanks [[Special:Contributions/108.162.229.49\|108.162.229.49]] 20:45, 31 August 2016 (UTC) Sylvain M.		:Can you elaborate or give a reference? Thanks [[Special:Contributions/108.162.229.49\|108.162.229.49]] 20:45, 31 August 2016 (UTC) Sylvain M.
		+
		+
		+	:Okay. Since I'm a Korean, let me start with Hangul, which is used to write Korean language. The beauty of Hangul is that a complete letter is consisted of 2~3 'jamo's(consonants or vowels). The first one is a consonant and called 'chosung', second one is a vowel and called 'joongsung', the last one's a consonant and called 'jongsung'. Possible numbers for each are 125, 95, 138. So total possible number of a letter is 1,638,750. But that's a theoretical number and actually frequently used letters are not that much. So in Unicode 1.0 there were 2,350 complete letters. However, it trimmed too much and was missing quite lots of letters. So 4,516 letters were added in Unicode 1.1. Unfortunately, this time the order of charset table was all messed up. You need a program to construct a letter from jamos and it was almost impossible to make a program that does consistent conversion. So in Unicode 2.0 these areas were totally scrapped, and 11,172 letters were allocated in a new area.
		+	:The Hangul charset was mostly settled there. The rest of 1,638,750 hangul letters that are rarely used are constructed by another method, writing three jamos in sequence. You might ask why we didn't use this method in the first place, that's because there would be too much overhead. We could have ended up using 4~6 byte per complete letter, instead of 2 byte per letter...
		+	:You can still find "CJK unified ideographs" [https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Unicode#Versions\|keep being added even in recent Unicode versions]. Since these ideographs are used in so vast area and different countries, there are so many similar but different characters. AFAIK these are mostly needed in Japanese names. [[Special:Contributions/141.101.84.120\|141.101.84.120]] 15:08, 1 September 2016 (UTC)

@@ Line 15: / Line 15: @@
 There is a good amount of detail regarding why/how the Unicode people are arguing over Emojis (In reference to the title text) but there is not much information provided regarding what Randall is referring to in the main strip, e.g. an example of what kind of language regulations the Unicode group try to impose. While the current explanation does a good job of explaining why there is a lot of drama regarding a Brontosaurus Emoji, the meat and potatoes of the article is in reference to language itself. I have never encountered anyone trying to communicate in English using letters that are not part of the current alphabet. Since English uses predefined Roman symbols for sound representation, and the Unicode people only deal with the representation of symbols, I am having a difficult time comprehending how the group in charge of rendering English into text would have any part in the changes that (at least English) is undergoing (which are largely related to spelling and grammar, not the symbols itself). [[User:Snowblinded|Snowblinded]] ([[User talk:Snowblinded|talk]]) 08:19, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
-:I think the main point of this comic is about using characters from different alphabets to get a funny look (or fool anti-spam). In Unicode, characters sharing the same design but from different alphabets have separate code-points. For example: U+0041 (latin "A"), U+0391 (greek "Alpha") and U+0410 (cyrillic "A") look exactly the same but are not interchangeable... neither in Unicode nor in real live since writing English with Greek letters doesn't make sense anyway. Example 2: U+0049 (latin "I"), U+2160 (roman numeral 1) and U+30BC (japanese "E") have a similar yet different look (and very different meaning), and so have different code-points (seems logical). One may want to mix them to get a funny typing... as long as writing proper English is not a concern. Conclusion: I hardly see how Unicode restricts anything, since the "consistent technical standards" pretty much already exist in any language. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.229.49|108.162.229.49]] 11:55, 30 August 2016 (UTC) Sylvain M.
+:I think the main point of this comic is about using characters from different alphabets to get a funny look (or fool anti-spam). In Unicode, characters sharing the same design but from different alphabets have separate code-points. For example: U+0041 (latin "A"), U+0391 (greek "Alpha") and U+0410 (cyrillic "A") look exactly the same but are not interchangeable... neither in Unicode nor in real life since writing English with Greek letters doesn't make sense anyway. Example 2: U+0049 (latin "I"), U+2160 (roman numeral 1) and U+30BC (japanese "E") have a similar yet different look (and very different meaning), and so have different code-points (seems logical). One may want to mix them to get a funny typing... as long as writing proper English is not a concern. Conclusion: I hardly see how Unicode restricts anything, since the "consistent technical standards" pretty much already exists in any language. [[Special:Contributions/108.162.229.49|108.162.229.49]] 11:55, 30 August 2016 (UTC) Sylvain M.
 I feel like he isn't trying to steer the river but the two confused looking people across the river. What else are their role if it's not the case?[[Special:Contributions/162.158.166.39|162.158.166.39]] 14:01, 30 August 2016 (UTC)
@@ Line 23: / Line 23: @@
 You don't need to go far as emoji to show how Unicode is doomed; the CJK(Chinese, Japanese, Korean) charsets, used in probably most developed countries outside of America/Europe, have had pretty tough time getting settled yet still have a few problems [[Special:Contributions/141.101.84.120|141.101.84.120]] 18:01, 31 August 2016 (UTC)