Standardizing codepoints

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
5 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Standardizing codepoints

J. Landman Gay via use-livecode
I’m a little over my head in this area so I may not be describing this quite right…
Some unicode glyphs seem to be describable with different (arrangements of) codepoints.  Is it possible to coerce the glyph to be described in a “standard” way?

--
Scott Morrow

Elementary Software
(Now with 20% less chalk dust!)
web       https://elementarysoftware.com/
email     [hidden email]
booth    1-360-734-4701
------------------------------------------------------








_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Standardizing codepoints

J. Landman Gay via use-livecode
What do you mean with standard? Do you mean that some combined codepoints show up as one glyph and your question is if there is one codepoint for every such combination? Or do you mean that several seemingly identical glyphs might have different codepoints? Unicode actually has a good introduction on their site: https://www.unicode.org/versions/Unicode10.0.0/ch01.pdf
that might answer some of your questions.

:-Håkan
On 15 Nov 2020, 11:16 +0100, scott--- via use-livecode <[hidden email]>, wrote:

> I’m a little over my head in this area so I may not be describing this quite right…
> Some unicode glyphs seem to be describable with different (arrangements of) codepoints. Is it possible to coerce the glyph to be described in a “standard” way?
>
> --
> Scott Morrow
>
> Elementary Software
> (Now with 20% less chalk dust!)
> web https://elementarysoftware.com/
> email [hidden email]
> booth 1-360-734-4701
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Standardizing codepoints

J. Landman Gay via use-livecode
In reply to this post by J. Landman Gay via use-livecode
I don't know what sort of situation you are describing.

I can only imagine you mean describing something like û as either u +
circumflex, or circumflexed u (ie, on glyph).

If you go here:

https://www.unicode.org/charts/

apart from going blue in the face at the absolutely mind-blowing extent
of the thing, you can isolate almost
every glyph you can imagine as a single glyph (rather than a combination
of several0.

If you are referring to surrogate pairs: forget them quickly, they are
old hat and guaranteed to give you
a permanent cluster headache.

Best, Richmond.

On 15.11.20 12:15, scott--- via use-livecode wrote:

> I’m a little over my head in this area so I may not be describing this quite right…
> Some unicode glyphs seem to be describable with different (arrangements of) codepoints.  Is it possible to coerce the glyph to be described in a “standard” way?
>
> --
> Scott Morrow
>
> Elementary Software
> (Now with 20% less chalk dust!)
> web       https://elementarysoftware.com/
> email     [hidden email]
> booth    1-360-734-4701
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode

_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Standardizing codepoints

J. Landman Gay via use-livecode
In reply to this post by J. Landman Gay via use-livecode
See the normalizeText entry in the dictionary, I think that might be what
you mean.
--
Jacqueline Landman Gay | [hidden email]
HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com
On November 15, 2020 4:17:14 AM scott--- via use-livecode
<[hidden email]> wrote:

> I’m a little over my head in this area so I may not be describing this
> quite right…
> Some unicode glyphs seem to be describable with different (arrangements of)
> codepoints.  Is it possible to coerce the glyph to be described in a
> “standard” way?
>
> --
> Scott Morrow
>
> Elementary Software
> (Now with 20% less chalk dust!)
> web       https://elementarysoftware.com/
> email     [hidden email]
> booth    1-360-734-4701
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> use-livecode mailing list
> [hidden email]
> Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your
> subscription preferences:
> http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode




_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: Standardizing codepoints

J. Landman Gay via use-livecode
Thank you all for your advice.  Jacque, normalizeText() was what I had vaguely remembered but couldn’t find.

Richmond, I am working on a library that removes emojis from text and replaces them with imageSource... so that the text can be printed to PDF on mobile. You are correct about the “going blue in the face” bit. And I’m pretty sure what I’m doing is just one step up from nothing.

— Scott

> On Nov 15, 2020, at 9:21 AM, J. Landman Gay via use-livecode <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
> See the normalizeText entry in the dictionary, I think that might be what you mean.
> --
> Jacqueline Landman Gay | [hidden email]
> HyperActive Software | http://www.hyperactivesw.com
> On November 15, 2020 4:17:14 AM scott--- via use-livecode <[hidden email]> wrote:
>
>> I’m a little over my head in this area so I may not be describing this quite right…
>> Some unicode glyphs seem to be describable with different (arrangements of) codepoints.  Is it possible to coerce the glyph to be described in a “standard” way?
>>
>> --
>> Scott Morrow
>>
>> Elementary Software
>> (Now with 20% less chalk dust!)
>> web       https://elementarysoftware.com/
>> email     [hidden email]
>> booth    1-360-734-4701
>> ------------------------------------------------------


_______________________________________________
use-livecode mailing list
[hidden email]
Please visit this url to subscribe, unsubscribe and manage your subscription preferences:
http://lists.runrev.com/mailman/listinfo/use-livecode