Representing Greek: the sequel
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 78
- Joined: Wed Jul 14, 2004 2:00 am
- Location: San Antonio, TX, USA
Representing Greek: the sequel
Amazing! Fantastic! Fabulous!
I have just completed the setup of KeyMan with ClassicalGreek as described here.
I can now switch back and forth from the Roman alphabet to the Greek alphabet with a simple keyboard shortcut (ctrl+alt+z for me, but you can pick whatever you like!)
The characters are Unicode, of course, so they won't be visible to users without Unicode support.
Testing:
αβξδεφγηιξκλμνοπθρστυνωχψζ
Can you see those?
I have just completed the setup of KeyMan with ClassicalGreek as described here.
I can now switch back and forth from the Roman alphabet to the Greek alphabet with a simple keyboard shortcut (ctrl+alt+z for me, but you can pick whatever you like!)
The characters are Unicode, of course, so they won't be visible to users without Unicode support.
Testing:
αβξδεφγηιξκλμνοπθρστυνωχψζ
Can you see those?
- klewlis
- Global Moderator
- Posts: 1673
- Joined: Tue Jul 29, 2003 1:48 pm
- Location: Vancouver, Canada
- Contact:
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 708
- Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2003 4:47 pm
- Location: Maryland
- Contact:
Hi Titus,
I've used Keyman for a few years now. Rarely is there a font problem in the 'normal' greek unicode range (your test case). But here's an example from the 'extended' greek unicode range - lower case alpha with acute.
ά
It looks to me, at least in 'Post a reply' preview, like a 'box' glyph. This is standard browser behavior when the character, decimal 8049 in this case, does not map to any glyph in the effective font.
Please note that I run my IE with a unicode font (Arial Unicode MS). I am regularly able to see greek glyphs, both in the normal and extended greek unicode ranges. But here, at least in preview, I do not.
We'll see what it looks like after I post it.
Cordially,
Paul
I've used Keyman for a few years now. Rarely is there a font problem in the 'normal' greek unicode range (your test case). But here's an example from the 'extended' greek unicode range - lower case alpha with acute.
ά
It looks to me, at least in 'Post a reply' preview, like a 'box' glyph. This is standard browser behavior when the character, decimal 8049 in this case, does not map to any glyph in the effective font.
Please note that I run my IE with a unicode font (Arial Unicode MS). I am regularly able to see greek glyphs, both in the normal and extended greek unicode ranges. But here, at least in preview, I do not.
We'll see what it looks like after I post it.
Cordially,
Paul
-
- Textkit Neophyte
- Posts: 78
- Joined: Wed Jul 14, 2004 2:00 am
- Location: San Antonio, TX, USA
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 708
- Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2003 4:47 pm
- Location: Maryland
- Contact:
Hi,
Yeah, Firefox on Win 2K also shows proper glyph. IE6 on Win2K does not. (A strange reversal; usually IE gets the fonts right and Mozilla doesn't).
But the larger problem is that Textkit-ers have different browsers across different platforms. Not all of us can see Unicode characters glyphs correctly.
However unpleasant SPIONIC looks (and its appearance, too, varies by browser/platform), it remains the more democratic of the several solutions.
Cordially,
Paul
Yeah, Firefox on Win 2K also shows proper glyph. IE6 on Win2K does not. (A strange reversal; usually IE gets the fonts right and Mozilla doesn't).
But the larger problem is that Textkit-ers have different browsers across different platforms. Not all of us can see Unicode characters glyphs correctly.
However unpleasant SPIONIC looks (and its appearance, too, varies by browser/platform), it remains the more democratic of the several solutions.
Cordially,
Paul
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 708
- Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2003 4:47 pm
- Location: Maryland
- Contact:
Hi,Eureka wrote:Surely, if we can all install SPIONIC, then we could all install Gentium instead (it has all the accent markers).
Then all we’d need is for the font to be added to TextKit…
Unless I am sorely mistaken - always a possibility - it's not that simple. The 'beauty' of SPIONIC is that it knows how to convert betacode (or nearly betacode) to the appropriate greek glyphs. That is, anyone using an ASCII text editor can create greek glyphs.
There is no such capability in the several Unicode fonts, e.g. Gentium. Gentium can properly show the glyph 'greek small alpha plus oxia' in response to the character 8049, but it can't convert the two ASCII characters a/ to the same glyph.
Try it yourself. Create a syntactically correct HTML file with this SPAN tag in the BODY:
<SPAN STYLE="font-family:spionic">a/</SPAN>
Open it in, say, IE. You should see alpha with an acute accent. Now change the tag to this:
<SPAN STYLE="font-family:gentium">a/</SPAN>
and reload the web page. You should see 'a/'.
In fine, not only is it a matter of having the right font, but of being able to generate the proper characters. NB: 'character' does not mean 'glyph'; it means the underlying numeric value which is mapped to a glyph by a font.
Cordially,
Paul
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 741
- Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 3:52 am
- Location: Melbourne, Australia
Oh. Although I've never programmed HTML in my life, I can see what you mean.
However, I would think that, rather than entering it as:
<SPAN STYLE="font-family:gentium">a/</SPAN>
You would enter it as:
<SPAN STYLE="font-family:gentium">ά</SPAN>
[Obviously except with ά being the glyph (or moreover its unicode number), rather than the two SPIONIC characters.]
But then again, I don't really know.
However, I would think that, rather than entering it as:
<SPAN STYLE="font-family:gentium">a/</SPAN>
You would enter it as:
<SPAN STYLE="font-family:gentium">ά</SPAN>
[Obviously except with ά being the glyph (or moreover its unicode number), rather than the two SPIONIC characters.]
But then again, I don't really know.
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 708
- Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2003 4:47 pm
- Location: Maryland
- Contact:
Yes, exactly. And that's my point. To effectively use a Unicode font, Textkit-ers would need to be able to enter Unicode data.Eureka wrote: You would enter it as:
<SPAN STYLE="font-family:gentium">ά</SPAN>
I suppose everyone could avail themselves of Keyman or something else like it. But I don't think everyone will be happy about this. I know there are some Unicode issues in older Windows (98, ME). Also, I don't know if this approach lends itself to non-Windows platforms.
Personally, I'd be much happier with a Unicode based solution. In fact, when I was new to Textkit I raised this very issue. But now it seems to me that SPIONIC is the simplest, one size fits all solution.
Cordially,
Paul
-
- Textkit Member
- Posts: 119
- Joined: Thu May 13, 2004 8:19 am
-
- Textkit Enthusiast
- Posts: 444
- Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 8:49 pm
-
- Textkit Zealot
- Posts: 757
- Joined: Tue Jul 22, 2003 2:55 am
-
- Textkit Enthusiast
- Posts: 444
- Joined: Mon Aug 23, 2004 8:49 pm
It is much more useful to learn vocabulary and grammar, then waisting my time with pitches and how to pronounce them all. I haven't met anyone who could manage it, e.g. when to use circumflex and how to speak it. It's a totally waist of time and perhaps also money. That explains why the ancients didn't bother too much with that and soon dropped them all to one single sign for the stress accent. I myself often do not write even the stress accent.