From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 Path: news.gmane.org!not-for-mail From: Drew Adams Newsgroups: gmane.emacs.devel Subject: RE: ASCII-only startup message? Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2015 09:42:36 -0800 (PST) Message-ID: <9e93866e-c6a4-42e3-b8b2-70fd6185b25e@default> References: <567ECD8C.1070408@cs.ucla.edu> <8360zlhy7x.fsf@gnu.org> <567EE043.9020109@cs.ucla.edu> <83y4chgh5q.fsf@gnu.org> <567EED47.1090700@cs.ucla.edu> <83si2pgci8.fsf@gnu.org> <567F22B1.9040702@cs.ucla.edu> <2dc99848-b6d5-4f53-b22c-66e29d15647c@default> <444c19cb-4687-41c4-8291-481f5b5a42a1@default> NNTP-Posting-Host: plane.gmane.org Mime-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable X-Trace: ger.gmane.org 1451238184 23968 80.91.229.3 (27 Dec 2015 17:43:04 GMT) X-Complaints-To: usenet@ger.gmane.org NNTP-Posting-Date: Sun, 27 Dec 2015 17:43:04 +0000 (UTC) Cc: emacs-devel@gnu.org To: =?utf-8?B?UGVyIFN0YXJiw6Rjaw==?= Original-X-From: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Sun Dec 27 18:42:50 2015 Return-path: Envelope-to: ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org Original-Received: from lists.gnu.org ([208.118.235.17]) by plane.gmane.org with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1aDFLE-0002R0-Ne for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 27 Dec 2015 18:42:48 +0100 Original-Received: from localhost ([::1]:42295 helo=lists.gnu.org) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aDFLD-00048U-Sv for ged-emacs-devel@m.gmane.org; Sun, 27 Dec 2015 12:42:47 -0500 Original-Received: from eggs.gnu.org ([2001:4830:134:3::10]:58409) by lists.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aDFL9-00044u-R4 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 27 Dec 2015 12:42:45 -0500 Original-Received: from Debian-exim by eggs.gnu.org with spam-scanned (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aDFL6-0001uG-I5 for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 27 Dec 2015 12:42:43 -0500 Original-Received: from userp1040.oracle.com ([156.151.31.81]:48875) by eggs.gnu.org with esmtp (Exim 4.71) (envelope-from ) id 1aDFL6-0001uC-BO for emacs-devel@gnu.org; Sun, 27 Dec 2015 12:42:40 -0500 Original-Received: from userv0021.oracle.com (userv0021.oracle.com [156.151.31.71]) by userp1040.oracle.com (Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2/Sentrion-MTA-4.3.2) with ESMTP id tBRHgciX004470 (version=TLSv1 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Sun, 27 Dec 2015 17:42:39 GMT Original-Received: from userv0121.oracle.com (userv0121.oracle.com [156.151.31.72]) by userv0021.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id tBRHgcsk020029 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=DHE-RSA-AES256-SHA bits=256 verify=FAIL); Sun, 27 Dec 2015 17:42:38 GMT Original-Received: from abhmp0002.oracle.com (abhmp0002.oracle.com [141.146.116.8]) by userv0121.oracle.com (8.13.8/8.13.8) with ESMTP id tBRHgbUo017297; Sun, 27 Dec 2015 17:42:37 GMT In-Reply-To: X-Priority: 3 X-Mailer: Oracle Beehive Extensions for Outlook 2.0.1.9 (901082) [OL 12.0.6691.5000 (x86)] X-Source-IP: userv0021.oracle.com [156.151.31.71] X-detected-operating-system: by eggs.gnu.org: GNU/Linux 2.4.x-2.6.x [generic] X-Received-From: 156.151.31.81 X-BeenThere: emacs-devel@gnu.org X-Mailman-Version: 2.1.14 Precedence: list List-Id: "Emacs development discussions." List-Unsubscribe: , List-Archive: List-Post: List-Help: List-Subscribe: , Errors-To: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Original-Sender: emacs-devel-bounces+ged-emacs-devel=m.gmane.org@gnu.org Xref: news.gmane.org gmane.emacs.devel:196981 Archived-At: > >> Unicode has muddle[d] it further by bad names for these > >> characters. I think ascii ' should have a name similar to ascii - > >> (HYPHEN-MINUS) which shows that this is something used as a stand-in > >> for several different characters. > > > > Yes. And not just the names. Unicode too has a single stand-in for > > multiple (2) characters. A single Unicode character is apparently > > meant (recommended) to represent both the apostrophe and the right > > single quotation mark. >=20 > I don't agree. It *is* one character that is used in several ways, > in that typographical traditional sees them as the same character. > (Important for Unicode is also that no previous character set > differentiated between them, because then it would have to as well, by > its design decisions.) Yes, we disagree. We don't disagree that the Unicode standard can define and recommend what it wants. And Unicode takes multiple languages into consideration and sometimes makes compromises. That's to be expected. We do disagree that an apostrophe is the same thing as a single quotation mark. The two might or might not look the same, but they function quite differently. Whether Unicode chooses one or two characters to represent those different functions is, well, a choice. IOW, "it *is* one character" ONLY if one sees it or defines it as such. If not, it is not. See the Q&A I referenced at the outset: http://english.stackexchange.com/a/36048/51214. Or google "apostrophe versus quotation mark" or similar. > That one character has several meanings, as the exclamation mark > "!" also means factorial doesn't mean it needs to be seen as two=20 > characters. Correct. It does not imply that it NEEDS to be seen as two characters. But it also does not imply that it NEEDS to be seen as the one and the same character. Consider the apostrophe and the prime mark. You could argue that they do not NEED to be seen as separate characters. But the (better) choice was made to use separate chars for them. (And again, we're talking "characters" now, not their glyphs.) Or consider character HYPHEN-MINUS (U+002D), character HYPHEN (U+2010), and character MINUS SIGN (U+2212). You might say that the first of these is analogous to the ASCII apostrophe (U+0027) - it is essentially for compatibility. But Unicode clearly separated hyphen from minus. NOT because they necessarily *look* different, but because they *are* different - they are *used* differently. Unicode made choices, and no doubt good ones. But they are *choices*: same char for different uses of !, same char for different uses of =E2=80=99, but different chars for different uses of =E2=88=92 and -. None of this was written in the stars; people made choices. Just as we are doing for Emacs. > I suspect that the thought that the apostrophe is "another" character > than one of the curly quotes wouldn't at all be so strong if the > Unicode name for ' wasn't APOSTROPHE but instead was TYPEWRITER SINGLE > QUOTATION MARK. Again, the argument for having two characters is based not on the appearance so much as on the different uses. Ask what an apostrophe IS and you will get the explanation that I cited (http://english.stackexchange.com/a/36048/51214). Ask what a quotation mark IS and you will get an entirely different explanation. They are different things, whether or not someone decides to represent them using the same character.