Shavian eGroup Archive Browser
From: Dennis Falk
Date: 1999-03-01 07:01:00 #
Subject: [shavian] Usage of Shavian fonts, etc.
Toggle Shavian
*mirf!* It seems eGroups has one _MAJOR_ flaw with its mailing-list
setup-- There's no "Reply-to:" mechanism to reply directly to the list....
:/
Anyhoo, it seems that DeMeyere's Shavian fonts are flawed in the
font-naming conventions if used in Windows, at least, as regardless
whether one uses ShawRough or ShawGothic, Windows reads it as "Shaw" The
only way I know to fix this somehow is to run the fonts through a font
editor, not exactly an option handy to many of us... :/
I think it's nice, actually, to have different font styles, obviously, but
we do need at least one standard Shaw font to use across platforms. As
with Mr. Rider, who is a friend of mine, he is on a Mac, while I use
Windows 3.1 offline here...
Personally, I'm glad that Shavian, regardless of font, adheres to a single
keymapping that makes usage of _any_ font possible. As for Mr. Rider's
query about using a different keymapping to accomodate his keyboard, I'm
not sure about Macs (or Apples, for that matter), but there should be
keybord remapping utilities that he can configure for his choice of
keys... :) I do know of such utilities for Windows, at least...
Anyhoo....
D.M.Falk, aka Quozl...
From: Ixbalam
Date: 1999-03-01 18:16:00 #
Subject: [shavian] Re: Usage of Shavian fonts, etc.
Toggle Shavian
In the message "[shavian] Usage of Shavian fonts, etc." dated 1999.03.01
(10:00 AM -0500), Quozl wrote:
> *mirf!* It seems eGroups has one _MAJOR_ flaw with its mailing-list
> setup-- There's no "Reply-to:" mechanism to reply directly to the list....
Agreed, that's annoying.
> Anyhoo, it seems that DeMeyere's Shavian fonts are flawed in the
> font-naming conventions if used in Windows, at least, as regardless
> whether one uses ShawRough or ShawGothic, Windows reads it as "Shaw" The
> only way I know to fix this somehow is to run the fonts through a font
> editor, not exactly an option handy to many of us... :/
Are the fonts given the names with no spaces or with hyphens in
them on Windows though? And you're right, a consistent cross-platform
generic font would be incredibly useful.
> Personally, I'm glad that Shavian, regardless of font, adheres to a single
> keymapping that makes usage of _any_ font possible. As for Mr. Rider's
> query about using a different keymapping to accomodate his keyboard, I'm
> not sure about Macs (or Apples, for that matter), but there should be
> keybord remapping utilities that he can configure for his choice of
> keys... :) I do know of such utilities for Windows, at least...
It was just an idea and a possible area for future inquiry. But
mapping each Shavian character to a definite ASCII character is great. Or
at least the best we can do until everyone uses two-byte text. =^.^=
I _have_ been looking for more samples of typical writing to see
what the most common characters are. There isn't much out there yet so
I've been running practice Shavian text files and 'normal' text files
through a snippet of BASIC to see what the typical frequencies are. If I
think they're different enough for a different keymap to be useful, I'll
work up a Mac kchr keymap for it. And yes, I'm weird. <G>
--
Michael J. Rider, aka Ixbalam http://i.am/ixbalam
"Power may justly be compared to a great River, which while kept within
its due Bounds, is both Beautiful and Useful; but when it overflows
its Banks, it is then too impetuous to be stemm'd, bears down all
before it, and brings Destruction and Desolation wherever it comes."
-John Peter Zenger
------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/shavian
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com
From: Ixbalam
Date: 1999-03-01 18:17:00 #
Subject: [shavian] Re: Shavian e-mail formatting
Toggle Shavian
In the message "[shavian] Shavian e-mail formatting" dated 1999.03.01 (6:40
AM -0500), Lionel Ghoti wrote:
> <!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN">
> <HTML>
> <HEAD>
>
> <META content=text/html;charset=iso-8859-1
>http-equiv=Content-Type><TITLE>Shavian Email Template</TITLE><!DOCTYPE
>HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN"><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD
>W3 HTML//EN"><!DOCTYPE HTML PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD W3 HTML//EN"><BASE
> href="file://C:\Program Files\Common Files\Microsoft Shared\Stationery\">
> <META content='"MSHTML 4.72.3110.7"' name=GENERATOR>
> </HEAD>
> <BODY bgColor=#ffffff>
> <P><FONT color=#000000 face=Arial size=1>Part of the HTML-formatted text
>below
> is written in the Shavian alphabet. To read it you will need a Shavian font,
> such as Lionspaw, Shaw-Gothic or Shaw-Rough. Links explaining where you can
> download them can be found at <A
href="http://www.homeusers.prestel.co.uk/den/shavian/fonts.html">www.homeusers.p
restel.co.uk/den/shavian/fonts.html</A></FONT></P>
> <P><FONT color=#000000 face=Lionspaw size=5
> ,"Shaw","Shaw-Rough","Shaw-Gothic","Shaw Rough","Shaw
> Gothic","Shavian"></FONT>Michael Rider asked if people prefer HTML or
>rich-text
> formatting in e-mail, and I'm confused. I thought that there were only
>two types
> of e-mail formatting: plain text and HTML-formatted text. Is there some
>sort of
> RTF standard as well? I use Outlook Express, and I prefer HTML-formatted
>e-mail
> (though Michael's Shavian text didn't appear properly on my computer,
>because
> the font name he used was "ShawRough", but the Shaw Rough font
>I have
> on my computer is registered with Windows as "Shaw"). I've
>created an
> HTML stationery file to be used with Outlook Express, which specifies the
>names
> of all the Shavian fonts I know of. This <EM>seems</EM> to work fine, but
>I've
> looked at the HTML of the messages I've sent, and it seems that Outlook
>Express
> has fiddled around with the HTML tags from my template, inserting all
>sorts of
> weird character combinations. Could everyone please tell me whether or
>not the
> Shavian portion of this message displays properly in their email program?</P>
Actually, Eudora Pro 4.0 (Macintosh) couldn't make heads or tails
of it and neither could anything else I have that can read HTML, except
Internet Explorer which did display it properly. The problem was the weird
MSHTML that only MS tools seem to understand properly. The strange font
tags were the greatest cause of trouble.
> <P><FONT color=#000000 face=Lionspaw size=5
> ,"Shaw","Shaw-Rough","Shaw-Gothic","Shaw Rough","Shaw
>Gothic","Shavian">/mFkal
The non-quoted stuff I can live with, but listing alternate fonts
in a comma delimited list inside the font tag after everything else? And
the purpose of the multiple doctype declarations is a mystery to me.
There is an RTF format for sending styled text in mail that Eudora,
Cyberdog and MacSOUP use. Others may or may not support it but the most
common mail readers seem to be Netscape, OE and AOL and I'm not sure how
well they understand it.
Maybe we could try sending out two versions with an [HTML] tag in
the subject of the formatted version. Eudora gives you the option of
stripping out styles on send so it would be easy to queue the same message
twice with and without HTML. In fact I sent a copy of that last message
directly to Quozl that way because he's on a shell account.
Or perhaps attaching RTF files to unstyled messages, which might be
less troublesome.
There is also a slight issue that may be the cause of
Dennis/Quozl's problem. I notice that the names listed for the DeMeyere
fonts in this message were Shaw-Gothic and Shaw-Rough and 'Shaw Gothic' and
'Shaw Rough'. The names they have on Macintosh are ShawGothic and
ShawRough, which my earlier message used.
--
Michael J. Rider, aka Ixbalam http://i.am/ixbalam
"Power may justly be compared to a great River, which while kept within
its due Bounds, is both Beautiful and Useful; but when it overflows
its Banks, it is then too impetuous to be stemm'd, bears down all
before it, and brings Destruction and Desolation wherever it comes."
-John Peter Zenger
------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/shavian
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com
From: Dennis Falk
Date: 1999-03-01 20:52:00 #
Subject: [shavian] Re: Usage of Shavian fonts, etc.
Toggle Shavian
>
> In the message "[shavian] Usage of Shavian fonts, etc." dated 1999.03.01
> (10:00 AM -0500), Quozl wrote:
>
> > *mirf!* It seems eGroups has one _MAJOR_ flaw with its mailing-list
> > setup-- There's no "Reply-to:" mechanism to reply directly to the list....
>
> Agreed, that's annoying.
Tried a group-reply, this time- Apologies for the double-emails, Ixy...
> > Anyhoo, it seems that DeMeyere's Shavian fonts are flawed in the
> > font-naming conventions if used in Windows, at least, as regardless
> > whether one uses ShawRough or ShawGothic, Windows reads it as "Shaw" The
> > only way I know to fix this somehow is to run the fonts through a font
> > editor, not exactly an option handy to many of us... :/
>
> Are the fonts given the names with no spaces or with hyphens in
> them on Windows though? And you're right, a consistent cross-platform
> generic font would be incredibly useful.
With spaces, I believe...
> > Personally, I'm glad that Shavian, regardless of font, adheres to a single
> > keymapping that makes usage of _any_ font possible. As for Mr. Rider's
> > query about using a different keymapping to accomodate his keyboard, I'm
> > not sure about Macs (or Apples, for that matter), but there should be
> > keybord remapping utilities that he can configure for his choice of
> > keys... :) I do know of such utilities for Windows, at least...
>
> It was just an idea and a possible area for future inquiry. But
> mapping each Shavian character to a definite ASCII character is great. Or
> at least the best we can do until everyone uses two-byte text. =^.^=
Well, I should correct myself and should've said in the above, "character
mapping", rather than "keymapping"-- Keymapping should, at best, be at the
individual's discretion, just as one would be using an ergonomic or Dvorak
keyboard, rather than good ol' QWERTY. Character mapping _should_ be
standardised-- Lord only knows how many non-Roman languages I've seen in
which have varying numbers of incompatible character sets-- Inuktitut,
Pahawh Hmong, Cherokee, Hindi... At least with Shavian, we can take any
text, highlight it, and change fonts- It'll read exactly the same. :) Much
as we already can read any ISO-Latin-1 text (in Windows, at least) with
just about any font we choose... :)
As for two-byte text, Win9x has support for it, and many newer fonts are
supporting the extended character set offered, but there are very few
options available to a legacy OS like Win3.x, which I use (offline)...
Even still, one would _still_ have to switch between fonts for whatever
typeface style to choose...
> I _have_ been looking for more samples of typical writing to see
> what the most common characters are. There isn't much out there yet so
> I've been running practice Shavian text files and 'normal' text files
> through a snippet of BASIC to see what the typical frequencies are. If I
> think they're different enough for a different keymap to be useful, I'll
> work up a Mac kchr keymap for it. And yes, I'm weird. <G>
One of the few Shavian sites, I believe, has three essays entirely in
Shavian-- A good start, but maybe there should be more? :) Not merely
essays, but functional, typical web-pages, such as (for example) a Shavian
links page...? :) Oddly enough, in spite of the lack of Shavian material,
there is perhaps more Shavian on the web NOW than there ever has been in
print, which was, for all practical purposes, was limited to Shaw's
"Androcles and the Lion", and any notes therein... Let's see-- Two poems,
a prayer, 3 essays, two PDFs with sample text... Am I missing something?
:) Amongst the 2 DeMeyere fonts (In which I had to convert ShawGothic for
Windows use myself) and Lionel's "Lionspaw", there's also (at least) a TeX
metafont (an many, many archives) called "Shavian"... And of course, Mr.
Rider's Shavian font for the Apple IIgs...
D.M.Falk, aka Quozl...
From: A.M.Callaway
Date: 1999-03-02 05:02:00 #
Subject: [shavian] Re: Shavian e-mail formatting
Toggle Shavian
Yep. Works OK for me. Except it didn't print properly.
Oulook seems to support some sort of RTF standard, but I think most people would have trouble with it, as they do with HTML. I'm using Oulook, but I still get garbled HTML messages.
-----Original Message-----
From: Lionel Ghoti [mailto:ghoti@...]
Sent: Monday, 1 March 1999 21:41
To: Shavian Egroup
Subject: [shavian] Shavian e-mail formatting
Part of the HTML-formatted text below is written in the Shavian alphabet. To read it you will need a Shavian font, such as Lionspaw, Shaw-Gothic or Shaw-Rough. Links explaining where you can download them can be found at www.homeusers.prestel.co.uk/den/shavian/fonts.html
Michael Rider asked if people prefer HTML or rich-text formatting in e-mail, and I'm confused. I thought that there were only two types of e-mail formatting: plain text and HTML-formatted text. Is there some sort of RTF standard as well? I
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/shavian
Free Web-based e-mail groups by www.eGroups.com
From: A.M.Callaway
Date: 1999-03-02 05:02:30 #
Subject: [shavian] Re: Intro
Toggle Shavian
I can see that we would end up with a Chinese unicode font, a Cyrillic unicode font and so-on, instead of a global font that had every possible character in it. However, in a lot of foreign languages that use a different alphabet, I've noticed they do tend to drop back to the Latin font occasionally. Names, usually, but sometimes other terms that don't translate well I think.
BTW What's PNG? I've heard the term, but it now escapes me.
Incidentally, your attempt at Shavian came out looking like this:
Fv sIn sevxl editxz TAt Vzd it fP Ezan laNgYiJiz
-----Original Message-----
From: Ixbalam [mailto:jaguar@...]
Sent: Monday, 1 March 1999 11:01
To: shavian@...
Subject: [shavian] Re: Intro
[snip]
I've seen several editors that used it for Asian languages but can't think of anything intended for editing the private use space characters like Shavian, Klingon and Tolkien's languages.
I think with Unicode it's a case of a complete solution with everything going for it but not being very widely adopted, like the PNG graphics format.
[snip]
Please excuse my inexperience with Shavian and maybe unreadable formatting. Does everyone else prefer HTML or richtext formatting in email?
--
Michael J. Rider, aka Ixbalam http://i.am/ixbalam
[snip]
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/shavian
Free Web-based e-mail groups by www.eGroups.com
From: A.M.Callaway
Date: 1999-03-02 05:14:00 #
Subject: [shavian] Attachments
Toggle Shavian
Evenin' All...
What's the general rule about posting attachments in this group? I want to
distribute my Shaw Script font and this is the only method available to me
at the moment. But I feel by doing it this way, I will just be spamming
everyone unnecessarily.
BTW if we do ever get to reform our spelling, might I suggest that
"necessary" be the first word out the door... :-(
Toodle-Pip
A.M.Callaway
aca-@...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/shavian
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com
From: Dennis Falk
Date: 1999-03-02 11:40:00 #
Subject: [shavian] Re: Intro
Toggle Shavian
> I can see that we would end up with a Chinese unicode font, a Cyrillic
> unicode font and so-on, instead of a global font that had every possible
> character in it. However, in a lot of foreign languages that use a different
> alphabet, I've noticed they do tend to drop back to the Latin font
> occasionally. Names, usually, but sometimes other terms that don't translate
> well I think.
The largest known Unicode font has only about 1/2 of the complete Unicode
set, or almost 28,000 characters, so far... Naturally, it's something like
10 or so megs in size...
> BTW What's PNG? I've heard the term, but it now escapes me.
Portable Network Graphics, pronounced "PiNG"-- Intended to be a
replacement to the GIF format, and is better at lossless compression than
any previous format, and can do 24-bit... (LPEG compresses better, only
because it's lossy, but can't do anything other than 24-bit colour or
8-bit greyscale...)
D.M.Falk, who did a little time in the PiNG development...
From: Dennis Falk
Date: 1999-03-02 11:51:00 #
Subject: [shavian] Attachments
Toggle Shavian
> From: "A.M.Callaway" aca-@...
>
> Evenin' All...
>
> What's the general rule about posting attachments in this group? I want to
> distribute my Shaw Script font and this is the only method available to me
> at the moment. But I feel by doing it this way, I will just be spamming
> everyone unnecessarily.
You could always forward the font to one of us (instead of the list) to
have it placed on a webpage-- I am _not_ sure how eGroups handles file
attatchments... I'm working on a Shavian page, meself, and would be happy
to host the font for you... :)
> BTW if we do ever get to reform our spelling, might I suggest that
> "necessary" be the first word out the door... :-(
Shavian isn't supposed to reform our _vocabulary_, just how we _write_
English... Typing it would be like "neseserI"... (Note: Since I'm not
using this mailing list in a web-based environment, I cannot do font
tags... Even then, my online browser is Lynx... Just highlight the word
and change the font to one of the Shavian fonts... Oh, and _offline_
font-based text isn't a problem to me... :) )
D.M.Falk
From: A.M.Callaway
Date: 1999-03-05 05:16:00 #
Subject: [shavian] Re: Attachments
Toggle Shavian
> You could always forward the font to one of us (instead of the list) to
> have it placed on a webpage
I've already sent the font to a couple of people (Hugh, Ross) and basically
got the response "It's a very nice font, but..." However, I think I've
sorted out all its problems now, so the response might be a little more
positive.
> I'm working on a Shavian page, meself, and would be happy
> to host the font for you... :)
Why thankyou kind sir. However, I think you should look at the font before
committing yourself. I'll send you a private message with it attached, so
you can judge it for yourself.
> Shavian isn't supposed to reform our _vocabulary_, just how we _write_
> English... Typing it would be like "neseserI"...
I'm just complaining about the fact that it's one of the few words that I
/always/ have to look up in the dictionary before using it.
Toodle-Pip
A.M.Callaway
aca-@...
------------------------------------------------------------------------
eGroup home: http://www.eGroups.com/list/shavian
Free Web-based e-mail groups by eGroups.com