Shawalphabet YahooGroup Archive Browser

--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, dshep rambled on :

> And now, another test. Andagii and ESL Gothic apparently
> overrule other Shavian unicode fonts. So I've disabled them,
> and for good measure Damase as well, to see if I can get
> Everson Mono to appear at the Shavian Alphabet Yahoo
> Group webpage. It will not appear in the e-mail summaries
> unless the recipient has installed this particular font.
>
> ð`¢ð`³ð`¯ð`• ð`©ð`œð`§ð`¯,
ð`¦ð``ð`• ð``ð`²ð`¥
> ð`"ð`·ð`® ð`¤ð`²ð`¤ð`©ð`'ð`•
ð`¦ð`¯ ð`šð`¤ð`µð`¥,
ð`›ð`¦ð`ð`²ð`¯.
> ð`¢ð`ªð`Ÿ ð`žð`¨ð`® ð`©
ð`¢ð`¦ð`¯ð``ð`©ð`®?



Result of recent test:




The Shavian text in message 3314 does appear on my browser,

Safari, I think in Everson Mono as intended--at least there is

greater spacing between the letters which is welcome--but when

copied and pasted into TextEdit converts into Andagii. It also

appears in this same font in the daily summary sent by e-mail.

This is an interesting occurrence as Andagii had been previously

disabled; it is OFF, says FontBook. Can it refuse to be turned

off? Are there superpowers at work? Another curious detail is that

in the text bit below (if it comes through), copied from the TextEdit
sample, only the letters are in Andagii--spacing and punctuation are in
Arial. This might not hold true in this present example as it is being
typed directly into the 'reply' window of this group's web page. So this
too is a test.


ð`¢ð`³ð`¯ð`• ð`©ð`œð`§ð`¯,
ð`¦ð``ð`• ð``ð`²ð`¥

ð`"ð`·ð`® ð`¤ð`²ð`¤ð`©ð`'ð`•
ð`¦ð`¯ ð`šð`¤ð`µð`¥,
ð`›ð`¦ð`ð`²ð`¯.

ð`¢ð`ªð`Ÿ ð`žð`¨ð`® ð`©
ð`¢ð`¦ð`¯ð``ð`©ð`®?



Now another result, using the same browser but on a different computer,
viewing the same posting, displays the Shavian text in another font, I'm
not quite sure which, but when transferred to TextEdit emerges as
Androcles, even though it too had been disabled. Moreover the spacing
and punctuation are now shown in Georgia. It's as if they were able to
decide themselves when and where to make themselves available. I'm sure
there is some reasonable explanation and I'm also sure if there were I
would probably not understand it.
..................................................
At the top of this window, above the icons, are listed the fonts
(Rich-Text alternative) that Yahoo allows you to write with if you use
this method to reply to any posting. They are:
Arial, Arial Narrow, Arial Black, (and yes) Comic Sans, (old
reliable)Courier,Georgia, System (like Tekton), Times New Roman, and
Verdana.
I wish it would allow Optima, and Lydian, and Humana, and also a very
useful font, Gentium, which allows you to use a full range of phonetic
symbols.
dshep

Sounds like OS X is doing font substitution. See <http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Font_substitution>.

I'd bet that Andagii is being chosen as a fallback Shavian font because it's the first font, alphabetically, that has glyphs in that particular Unicode range.

I'm not 100% sure why a disabled font is still being used, though. My best guess is that fonts are cached aggressively and not totally flushed out until your system is rebooted.

> spacing and punctuation are in Arial

If Andagii doesn't have spaces and punctuation in it, then the punctuation will have to come from some other font (or nothing'll show up at all).

I suspect most of the font variation you're seeing is what happens when you copy and paste plain Unicode text onto different systems with different fallback fonts available to them. I haven't seen any knobs in OS X for setting the different priority levels of fallback fonts.

For what it's worth, I'm using OS X Mail, and what everyone else says is Shavian looks like a collection of eths (ð) and backticks (`) interspersed with other characters that aren't in 7-bit-ASCII. I suspect Mail has mis-guessed the encoding of these messages, or Yahoo is mis-guessing the encoding, and Mail is treating Yahoo's bad guess as holy writ.

On Jun 17, 2013, at 10:15 AM, dshepx <david@...> wrote:

> --- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, dshep rambled on :
>
> > And now, another test. Andagii and ESL Gothic apparently
> > overrule other Shavian unicode fonts. So I've disabled them,
> > and for good measure Damase as well, to see if I can get
> > Everson Mono to appear at the Shavian Alphabet Yahoo
> > Group webpage. It will not appear in the e-mail summaries
> > unless the recipient has installed this particular font.
> >
> > ð`¢ð`³ð`¯ð`• ð`©ð`œð`§ð`¯, ð`¦ð``ð`• ð``ð`²ð`¥
> > ð`"ð`·ð`® ð`¤ð`²ð`¤ð`©ð`'ð`• ð`¦ð`¯ ð`šð`¤ð`µð`¥, ð`›ð`¦ð`ð`²ð`¯.
> > ð`¢ð`ªð`Ÿ ð`žð`¨ð`® ð`© ð`¢ð`¦ð`¯ð``ð`©ð`®?
>
>
>
> Result of recent test:
>
>
>
> The Shavian text in message 3314 does appear on my browser,
>
> Safari, I think in Everson Mono as intended--at least there is
>
> greater spacing between the letters which is welcome--but when
>
> copied and pasted into TextEdit converts into Andagii. It also
>
> appears in this same font in the daily summary sent by e-mail.
>
> This is an interesting occurrence as Andagii had been previously
>
> disabled; it is OFF, says FontBook. Can it refuse to be turned
>
> off? Are there superpowers at work? Another curious detail is that
>
> in the text bit below (if it comes through), copied from the TextEdit
>
> sample, only the letters are in Andagii--spacing and punctuation
> are in Arial. This might not hold true in this present example as it
> is being typed directly into the 'reply' window of this group's web
> page. So this too is a test.
>
>
> ð`¢ð`³ð`¯ð`• ð`©ð`œð`§ð`¯, ð`¦ð``ð`• ð``ð`²ð`¥
>
> ð`"ð`·ð`® ð`¤ð`²ð`¤ð`©ð`'ð`• ð`¦ð`¯ ð`šð`¤ð`µð`¥, ð`›ð`¦ð`ð`²ð`¯.
>
> ð`¢ð`ªð`Ÿ ð`žð`¨ð`® ð`© ð`¢ð`¦ð`¯ð``ð`©ð`®?
>
>
>
> Now another result, using the same browser but on a different
> computer, viewing the same posting, displays the Shavian text
> in another font, I'm not quite sure which, but when transferred
> to TextEdit emerges as Androcles, even though it too had been
> disabled. Moreover the spacing and punctuation are now shown
> in Georgia. It's as if they were able to decide themselves when
> and where to make themselves available. I'm sure there is some
> reasonable explanation and I'm also sure if there were I would
> probably not understand it.
>

--- In shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com, dshep wonders :

Why do only 48 rejected characters become so many unintelligible
symbols? But, lesson learnt,again -- something discovered some time ago
but forgotten, so blunders are repeated. To use Yahoo's reply option
is convenient but limited. It seems that you may only introduce Shavian
unicode fonts (some of them anyway) in e-mail postings. Here, you are
restricted to:
Arial, Arial Narrow, and Arial Black (unobtrusive); Comic Sans (the
font many people love to hate);Courier (to remind us of the typewriter
age;System (to look handwritten, for the arty-crafty); Times New Roman
(seen in a newspaper near you);Georgia (a practical, no nonsense serif
font);Verdana (a practical, no nonsense sans-serif font).

Hello to all!

I have learned the Esperanto version of the Shavian alphabet and I would like to exchange hand-written practice texts or correspondence with someone who knows Esperanto.(I especially enjoy describing photographs.) I am enjoying the Shavian alphabet very much, and I hope to be able to contribute to its continued use. Beginners are welcome--I'm one too!
Please write to me at ejfelker@... for my address.

Erik Felker

I would like to eliminate the use of Quote signs altogether in Shavian Script. Perhaps we could have an additional font for Direct speech, a little bigger and bolder than the ordinary Shaw font in which we would write the regular Indirect speech.

regards, Paul V.

--- In shawalphabet@...m, dsh <david@...> wrote:
>
> The evolution of words for zero--
>
> "ð`¦ð`` ð`¦ð`Ÿ ð`•ð`§ð`› ð`žð`¨ð`` ð`·ð`¤ ·ð`'ð`±ð`¥ð`šð`®ð`¦ð`¡ ð`•ð`'ð`ªð`¤ð`©ð`®ð`Ÿ
>
> ð`'ð`·ð`¤ ð`žð`© ð`•ð`²ð`"ð`©ð`® ð`·ð`` ð`¨ð`¯ð`› ð`·ð`¤ ·ð`ªð`'ð`•ð`"ð`©ð`®ð`›
>
> ð`•ð`'ð`ªð`¤ð`©ð`®ð`Ÿ ð`'ð`·ð`¤ ð`¦ð`` ð`¯ð`·ð``."
>
> Attributed to the OED in
> 'The Book of Nothing', by
> John Barrow (2000)
>

On 19 Jun 2013, at 07:29, paul <vandenbrinkg@...> wrote:

> I would like to eliminate the use of Quote signs altogether in Shavian Script.

I wouldn't.

> Perhaps we could have an additional font for Direct speech, a little bigger and bolder than the ordinary Shaw font in which we would write the regular Indirect speech.

Nah. No improvement with that scheme. Moreover, it's not portable in plain text, only in marked-up text.

Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/

I'm curious as to your reasoning on that. As a writer and a reader, I would find it very distracting to read:

She walked up to him, her head held high. I have to do this, she reminded herself, for them. I'll never yield to you,she said haughtily,nor will my people!

I mean, while it stands out, it's a right pain in the butt for someone who actually DOES the writing to switch fonts, bold, and/or size and theres not really a button for that. And as someone who reads a lot of fiction, it would strain my eyes to have to shift. Naturally, the eyes would start skipping the important bits between quotes, and it's just a mess for everyone involved. Like spelling, punctuation in English is almost an art, but when it comes to clarity, it would be like taking the comma. I'm sorry the rules are difficult, but so are the rules to baseball, yet people seem to adapt.

--Erin

 
==========
Stare long enough at the frog, eventually, the frog stares back at you, and then it gets bored and stares at something else.


>________________________________
> From: Michael Everson <everson@...>
>To: shawalphabet@yahoogroups.com
>Sent: Wednesday, June 19, 2013 4:01 AM
>Subject: Re: [shawalphabet] Quotes in Shavian Script
>
>
>
> 
>On 19 Jun 2013, at 07:29, paul <vandenbrinkg@...> wrote:
>
>> I would like to eliminate the use of Quote signs altogether in Shavian Script.
>
>I wouldn't.
>
>> Perhaps we could have an additional font for Direct speech, a little bigger and bolder than the ordinary Shaw font in which we would write the regular Indirect speech.
>
>Nah. No improvement with that scheme. Moreover, it's not portable in plain text, only in marked-up text.
>
>Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
>
>
>
>
>

Earlier this week dipartite pointed out:

> Sounds like OS X is doing font substitution.

That reminds me of those occasions when the doctor says 'you have …..".
The ailment is not thereby improved but somehow it is a comfort to know
there is a name for it. Font substitution, sounds definitive.

> If Andagii doesn't have spaces and punctuation in it, then the punctuation
> will have to come from some other font (or nothing'll show up at all).

Test with image:



Test with spaces of another font inserted:

...................
\ 𐑦 𐑪 |
\ 𐑧 𐑩 |
\ 𐑨 |
\……….....|

> For what it's worth, I'm using OS X Mail, and what everyone else says is
> Shavian looks like a collection of Eths......

This happened regularly when we only had ASCII fonts, which the introduction
of unicode fonts was supposed to cure. Fonts are complicated, I wish I understood
them.

𐑥𐑦𐑛𐑕𐑳𐑥𐑩𐑮 𐑩𐑜𐑧𐑯,
·𐑛𐑖𐑧𐑐




--Apple-Mail-45-418566788
Content-Type: multipart/related;
type="text/html";
boundary=Apple-Mail-46-418566788

On Jun 20, 2013, at 1:01 AM, dsh <david@...> wrote:

> Earlier this week dipartite pointed out:
>
> > For what it's worth, I'm using OS X Mail, and what everyone else says is
> > Shavian looks like a collection of Eths......
>
> This happened regularly when we only had ASCII fonts, which the introduction
> of unicode fonts was supposed to cure. Fonts are complicated, I wish I understood
> them.
>
> 𐑥𐑦𐑛𐑕𐑳𐑥𐑩𐑮 𐑩𐑜𐑧𐑯,
> ·𐑛𐑖𐑧𐑐

This is, almost certainly, caused by Yahoo receiving emails encoded in UTF-8 and then sending them back out again with an erroneous header saying they're encoded in a common legacy encoding, likely ISO-8859-15 or Windows-1252.

This will be fixed when everyone blithely assumes the same encoding — hopefully UTF-8 — instead of other ones. To the extent that assumptions are made.

Poe Meets Shaw is now on sale through web based retailers including, at the very least, Amazon, Barnes & Noble and Chapters.

http://www.amazon.com/Poe-Meets-Shaw-Alphabet-Edition/dp/0991819306/ref=pd_rhf_ee_p_t_1_W4RZ
http://www.barnesandnoble.com/w/poe-meets-shaw-tim-browne/1114865574?ean=9780991819300
http://www.chapters.indigo.ca/usedbooks/poe-meets-shaw-the-shaw/grp24351845-9780991819300-rare.html?ikwid=%22poe+meets+shaw%22&ikwsec=Fallback+Used+Books

It SHOULD also be available through any brick and mortar shops that order their books through the Ingram catalogue. The Amazon link can be localised by changing the .com to .ca, .co.uk or .de at least. The US branch is selling it for 10% off, UK for 8%, Canada for 3% and I'm not sure about the German one. I'm not sure what's going on with the Chapters site, as they're charging about 15% above retail and classifying it as "Used and Rare", even though it's POD.
To help offset the cost for everybody, I've discounted both books on the Lulu site by 20% for the month of July to help defray the cost of shipping. You can also get an additional 5% discount with the code FAST5 or $20 off 20 books or more with the code 20420. You can find both books at

www.lulu.com/shop/search.ep?type=&keyWords=poe+meets+shaw&x=0&y=0&sitesearch=lulu.com&q=

Happy Canada Day, everybody! :-)