From everson at evertype.com  Tue Sep  6 14:30:49 2016
From: everson at evertype.com (Michael Everson)
Date: Tue, 6 Sep 2016 14:30:49 +0100
Subject: [Egyptian] Hieratic dot
Message-ID: <68A1A260-48D3-4BD1-9DE2-8F6C6C1BE45F@evertype.com>

If anyone is interested in this hieratic dot I will need evidence of use, glyph variation, and meaning. 

Michael


From s.polis at ulg.ac.be  Wed Sep  7 08:10:48 2016
From: s.polis at ulg.ac.be (=?utf-8?Q?St=C3=A9phane_polis?=)
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2016 09:10:48 +0200
Subject: [Egyptian] Hieratic dot
In-Reply-To: <68A1A260-48D3-4BD1-9DE2-8F6C6C1BE45F@evertype.com>
References: <68A1A260-48D3-4BD1-9DE2-8F6C6C1BE45F@evertype.com>
Message-ID: <474E0275-D1FF-4BC2-83F7-D8D984FEA710@ulg.ac.be>

There are a bunch of hieratic signs (the dot that you mention, but also other types of strokes, special crosses, etc.) that are regularly used in hieroglyphic transcriptions of hieratic texts (especially of administrative ones), but are not yet in Unicode. Couldn?t we envision to deal with several of them at the same time and to prepare a more comprehensive document about the hieratic signs in hieroglyphic transcriptions in general? Or is it wiser to include one after another?

St.

------------------------------------------------------
Chercheur qualifi? F.R.S.-FNRS

Universit? de Li?ge
Service d'?gyptologie
D?partement des sciences de l?Antiquit?
Place du 20-Ao?t,
B-4000 Li?ge

http://www.egypto.ulg.ac.be
------------------------------------------------------



> Le 6 sept. 2016 ? 15:30, Michael Everson <Everson at evertype.com> a ?crit :
> 
> If anyone is interested in this hieratic dot I will need evidence of use, glyph variation, and meaning. 
> 
> Michael
> _______________________________________________
> Egyptian mailing list
> Egyptian at evertype.com
> http://evertype.com/mailman/listinfo/egyptian_evertype.com




From mn31 at st-andrews.ac.uk  Wed Sep  7 09:30:52 2016
From: mn31 at st-andrews.ac.uk (Mark-Jan Nederhof)
Date: Wed, 07 Sep 2016 09:30:52 +0100
Subject: [Egyptian] Hieratic dot
In-Reply-To: <474E0275-D1FF-4BC2-83F7-D8D984FEA710@ulg.ac.be>
References: <68A1A260-48D3-4BD1-9DE2-8F6C6C1BE45F@evertype.com>
 <474E0275-D1FF-4BC2-83F7-D8D984FEA710@ulg.ac.be>
Message-ID: <2595736.6yDldOMjq3@bear>

My 2 cents: if domain experts are willing to write such a comprehensive document, detailing not only the relevant
glyphs but also an accurate characterization of typical use of the signs, including recommendations when to use
one sign rather than another, based on the experts' understanding of the writing system, then it seems self-evident 
to me this is preferable over anything else.

Mark-Jan

On Wednesday 07 Sep 2016 09:10:48 St?phane polis wrote:
> There are a bunch of hieratic signs (the dot that you mention, but also other types of strokes, special crosses, etc.) that are regularly used in hieroglyphic transcriptions of hieratic texts (especially of administrative ones), but are not yet in Unicode. Couldn?t we envision to deal with several of them at the same time and to prepare a more comprehensive document about the hieratic signs in hieroglyphic transcriptions in general? Or is it wiser to include one after another?
> 
> St.
> 
> ------------------------------------------------------
> Chercheur qualifi? F.R.S.-FNRS
> 
> Universit? de Li?ge
> Service d'?gyptologie
> D?partement des sciences de l?Antiquit?
> Place du 20-Ao?t,
> B-4000 Li?ge
> 
> http://www.egypto.ulg.ac.be
> ------------------------------------------------------
> 
> 
> 
> > Le 6 sept. 2016 ? 15:30, Michael Everson <Everson at evertype.com> a ?crit :
> > 
> > If anyone is interested in this hieratic dot I will need evidence of use, glyph variation, and meaning. 
> > 
> > Michael
> > _______________________________________________
> > Egyptian mailing list
> > Egyptian at evertype.com
> > http://evertype.com/mailman/listinfo/egyptian_evertype.com
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Egyptian mailing list
> Egyptian at evertype.com
> http://evertype.com/mailman/listinfo/egyptian_evertype.com
> 



From bobqq at live.co.uk  Wed Sep  7 16:56:22 2016
From: bobqq at live.co.uk (Bob Richmond)
Date: Wed, 7 Sep 2016 15:56:22 +0000
Subject: [Egyptian] Hieratic dot
In-Reply-To: <68A1A260-48D3-4BD1-9DE2-8F6C6C1BE45F@evertype.com>
References: <68A1A260-48D3-4BD1-9DE2-8F6C6C1BE45F@evertype.com>
Message-ID: <HE1PR1001MB1067CDF48EBE7FE59DEFAF2791F80@HE1PR1001MB1067.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>

Hi Michael



There are many photographic examples in the collections part of the BM website. These are CC licensing useable. E.g. Papyrus Harris 500  http://www.britishmuseum.org/research/collection_online/collection_object_details/collection_image_gallery.aspx?assetId=439180001&objectId=114255&partId=1 showing red dot.



Plenty of manuscript transcriptions such as Egyptian Hieratic Texts: transcribed, translated and annotated by Alan H. Gardiner. Series I: Literary texts of the new kingdom (1911) downloadable from http://www.etana.org/node/693. Transcription in print using a hieroglyphic font illustrated in Gardiners Notes on The Story of Sinuhe (1916) http://www.etana.org/sites/default/files/coretexts/15243.pdf.



100 years later, I?ve not yet seen this topic written up by Egyptologists but surely somebody must have done something ? anyone know of a document/reference? How is this taught in Egyptology? Hieratic transcription is an artificial process anyway so it ought to be possible to agree a conventional use for dot in print/digital.



MdC has codes O and o for black and red hieratic dot but as far as I?m aware use has never been clearly documented ? technically, the codes can be used in MdC quadrats like hieroglyphs. But they are not, orthographically speaking so no need to carry that to Unicode. My default font placement puts the dots at the top of the line by default (and I have a low variant) but other renderings differ. Examples of MdC transcriptions I?ve seen can be haphazard on dot placement.



I?ll keep an eye open for useful sources but it would be useful if one or more Egyptologists could document accurately. As always solid examples are essential.



Bob







From: Michael Everson<mailto:everson at evertype.com>
Sent: 06 September 2016 14:31
To: Egyptian at evertype<mailto:egyptian at evertype.com>
Subject: [Egyptian] Hieratic dot



If anyone is interested in this hieratic dot I will need evidence of use, glyph variation, and meaning.

Michael
_______________________________________________
Egyptian mailing list
Egyptian at evertype.com
http://evertype.com/mailman/listinfo/egyptian_evertype.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://evertype.com/pipermail/egyptian_evertype.com/attachments/20160907/4cd5ec44/attachment.htm>

From rosmord at gmail.com  Tue Sep 13 12:11:48 2016
From: rosmord at gmail.com (Serge Rosmorduc)
Date: Tue, 13 Sep 2016 13:11:48 +0200
Subject: [Egyptian] Hieratic dot
In-Reply-To: <68A1A260-48D3-4BD1-9DE2-8F6C6C1BE45F@evertype.com>
References: <68A1A260-48D3-4BD1-9DE2-8F6C6C1BE45F@evertype.com>
Message-ID: <1992E449-58E0-41A4-9588-17741EE97175@gmail.com>

Dear Michael,

As I don?t know if you have received some data, I have started compiling a few examples, which you will find here : http://www.qenherkhopeshef.org/VersePoint/

I guess some entries from the conference last summer in Liege would be useful too : http://www.egypto.ulg.ac.be/Colloque_Signes.pdf

Best regards,

Serge



> Le 6 sept. 2016 ? 15:30, Michael Everson <everson at evertype.com> a ?crit :
> 
> If anyone is interested in this hieratic dot I will need evidence of use, glyph variation, and meaning. 
> 
> Michael
> _______________________________________________
> Egyptian mailing list
> Egyptian at evertype.com
> http://evertype.com/mailman/listinfo/egyptian_evertype.com




From dwanders at sonic.net  Fri Sep 16 22:58:19 2016
From: dwanders at sonic.net (Deborah W. Anderson)
Date: Fri, 16 Sep 2016 14:58:19 -0700
Subject: [Egyptian] =?iso-8859-1?q?Preliminary_proposal_to_encode_M=F6ller?=
	=?iso-8859-1?q?=27s_Egyptian_Hieroglyphs_in_the_SMP_of_the_UCS?=
Message-ID: <002401d21065$6ff34180$4fd9c480$@sonic.net>

Dear list members,
Michael has submitted a preliminary proposal for additional characters,
building on what he circulated at the Cambridge meeting.
The document is located at:
http://www.unicode.org/L2/L2016/16250-n4741-moller-egyptian.pdf  

I have sent it on to the group at Mainz, and they will be able to comment on
it by early October. I have also send it to Barbara L?scher in Basel.

The proposal document mentions: "Experts are needed to carefully check
Vervloesem?s suggested mappings against Nederhof?s
and Richmond?s suggested mappings."

To assist in this endeavor, I created a spreadsheet showing the suggested
mappings by Vervloesem, Richmond, and Nederhof for the newly proposed
characters, as well as other characters in Moeller.

The Excel spreadsheet is available at:
http://www.unicode.org/L2/L2016/16251-n4742-moller-mapping.xlsx  
FYI: Grey highlighting in the spreadsheet indicates the newly proposed
characters for which Vervloesem, Richmond, and/or Nederhof have proposed a
mapping to Gardiner (/Unicode).
Yellow highlighting indicates newly proposed characters for which there is
no proposed mapping.

A document describing the spreadsheet is posted at:
http://www.unicode.org/L2/L2016/16251-n4742-moller-mapping.pdf  . (This
document contains the spreadsheet but in very tiny print.) 

Let me know if there are others whom you suggest I send this message to. 

With best wishes,
Debbie

 




From mn31 at st-andrews.ac.uk  Mon Sep 19 12:09:34 2016
From: mn31 at st-andrews.ac.uk (Mark-Jan Nederhof)
Date: Mon, 19 Sep 2016 12:09:34 +0100
Subject: [Egyptian] 
 =?utf-8?q?Preliminary_proposal_to_encode_M=C3=B6ller?=
 =?utf-8?q?=27s_Egyptian_Hieroglyphs_in_the_SMP_of_the_UCS?=
In-Reply-To: <002401d21065$6ff34180$4fd9c480$@sonic.net>
References: <002401d21065$6ff34180$4fd9c480$@sonic.net>
Message-ID: <1926839.bRjLxKCbEQ@thuis>

With the 1071 signs in Unicode, there may at present be roughly two ways of
encoding texts:

(1) There are not-quite-so-serious users like me who, perhaps from a misplaced
sense of being principled, refuse to use dubious, ill-documented,
ill-standardized sign lists derived from the Hieroglyphica, and who therefore
only use the Unicode set, as that is at least stable. Whenever they come
across a sign that is not in Unicode, they have to use a place holder. (I then
tend to use a question mark in my encoding, with a footnote describing what
the sign depicts.)

(2) Then there are serious users, like TLA and Ramses, who cannot afford to
leave place holders in their encoding. They use one from an infinite supply of
extended sets, and won't bother with Unicode, because that is much too
restrictive. They realise fully well of course what is wrong with the extended
sets, but at present there is no other alternative given their requirements.

Neither of these types of users is happy with the status quo. The solution
could be a thoroughly designed extended set in Unicode, properly researched
and documented.  A solid list is in the making, in the form of the
Thot sign list.  The problem is that this takes time and a lot of effort, and
apparently some people are not patient enough to wait for the project to be
completed, or at least for the project to be advanced enough to cover most
signs.

So what is to be done in the short term? For the people in (2) only
a very comprehensive collection of signs in Unicode will suffice, and
make them switch from their own sign lists to Unicode. But this is not
forthcoming. For the people in (1), what would help tremendously are 
incremental additions with the most frequent signs not yet in Unicode.
The most frequent signs also happen to be the ones that are best understood.
But incremental additions cost extra time and detract from the purpose of
building a more complete set.

In contrast, random small additions will be pointless and even harmful, because:

* Adding rare signs will not noticeably decrease the frequency of having
to leave place holders while encoding typical texts.

* The more unbalanced a sign list is, the more difficult it is for users to find their
way, and choose the most appropriate signs for an encoding.

* Premature additions may interfere with more additions later. Thorough and
systematic investigations will be needed for deciding between say graphical
variants and characters, and these investigations benefit from having a broad
view over the collection of signs in a comprehensive collection of texts, so
that the most appropriate choice can be made which shapes deserve to become
code points and be representatives of a range of variants.

Trying to fish accidental glyphs from Moeller that, probably for good reason,
didn't make their way into the Gardiner set leads exactly to an addition that
we don't need.  Sure, some font designers who have nothing better to do will
be happy to be able to draw a few more signs for their Unicode fonts, but the
extension will have zero benefit for people who are actually encoding texts.

What further bothers me is a repetition of mistakes from the past. What we
need is not only cross references, but a thorough and justified description of
what signs depict and mean. Only then can one answer the question how a sign
relates to other signs. I'm reminded of e.g. sign L008, a hapax sign (only one
obscure occurrence is known, with uncertain reading) that has been put under
the insects, for no reason that anyone can remember, and probably incorrectly.
Such things should never have happened. But if the same procedures are
followed for the next addition to the Unicode sign list, such calamities will
happen again.

By including even signs from Moeller that are in footnotes one is scraping the
barrel. Are we really so desperate to add as many signs as possible, no matter
for how bad a reason?

For example, 13458 refers to v3p4n1, a footnote for Moeller 36, which is
clearly identifiable with Gardiner A008. Those who can read German see that
the footnote says that the dots above the sign in some graphical variants are
"filler points", and that the sign should _not_ be associated with another
sign that is not known from hieratic, and that other sign I would read as the
man sowing seeds (A060), an existing sign. Why then that 13458 is proposed as
addition is beyond me.

As I wrote earlier, you need to analyse the meaning of signs. Only then can
you make informed decisions whether a sign is new. In many cases this requires
expert knowledge of hieratic and/or looking at signs in context in the
original hieratic documents. Two examples I spotted during superficial inspection:

* Consider 13482 for Moeller 257. If this is _not_ K4 (as it obviously is
according to Goedicke and the reading "XA" in Moeller) then you need to
explain why not. What reading, use or purpose would set this sign apart from
this or any other existing sign?

* I suspect all of us may have made wrong guesses based on appearances.  For
example, A051 for Moeller 27 (here proposed as a new sign 13452) may be wrong.
Goedicke associates this with A042 instead. Because A51 and A42 share some
uses, e.g. first-person ending, looking at one or two occurrences in hieratic
texts may not even suffice to decide which is which. 

Are we aware that obtaining any certainty on such matters will require serious
effort? Then the next question is, is it worth it? Or does it do more harm
than good?

Mark-Jan

On Friday 16 Sep 2016 14:58:19 Deborah W. Anderson wrote:
> Dear list members,
> Michael has submitted a preliminary proposal for additional characters,
> building on what he circulated at the Cambridge meeting.
> The document is located at:
> http://www.unicode.org/L2/L2016/16250-n4741-moller-egyptian.pdf  
> 
> I have sent it on to the group at Mainz, and they will be able to comment on
> it by early October. I have also send it to Barbara L?scher in Basel.
> 
> The proposal document mentions: "Experts are needed to carefully check
> Vervloesem's suggested mappings against Nederhof's
> and Richmond's suggested mappings."
> 
> To assist in this endeavor, I created a spreadsheet showing the suggested
> mappings by Vervloesem, Richmond, and Nederhof for the newly proposed
> characters, as well as other characters in Moeller.
> 
> The Excel spreadsheet is available at:
> http://www.unicode.org/L2/L2016/16251-n4742-moller-mapping.xlsx  
> FYI: Grey highlighting in the spreadsheet indicates the newly proposed
> characters for which Vervloesem, Richmond, and/or Nederhof have proposed a
> mapping to Gardiner (/Unicode).
> Yellow highlighting indicates newly proposed characters for which there is
> no proposed mapping.
> 
> A document describing the spreadsheet is posted at:
> http://www.unicode.org/L2/L2016/16251-n4742-moller-mapping.pdf  . (This
> document contains the spreadsheet but in very tiny print.) 
> 
> Let me know if there are others whom you suggest I send this message to. 
> 
> With best wishes,
> Debbie
> 
>  
> 
> 
> _______________________________________________
> Egyptian mailing list
> Egyptian at evertype.com
> http://evertype.com/mailman/listinfo/egyptian_evertype.com




From bobqq at live.co.uk  Thu Sep 22 14:11:15 2016
From: bobqq at live.co.uk (Bob Richmond)
Date: Thu, 22 Sep 2016 13:11:15 +0000
Subject: [Egyptian] 
 =?iso-8859-1?q?Preliminary_proposal_to_encode_M=F6lle?=
 =?iso-8859-1?q?r=27s_Egyptian_Hieroglyphs_in_the_SMP_of_the_UCS?=
In-Reply-To: <1926839.bRjLxKCbEQ@thuis>
References: <002401d21065$6ff34180$4fd9c480$@sonic.net>,
 <1926839.bRjLxKCbEQ@thuis>
Message-ID: <HE1PR1001MB1067502AF331099A4F8C6C6191C90@HE1PR1001MB1067.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>

Hi Michael



I agree with Mark-Jan Moeller 259 v1 looks like it can be identified with K004 . The v2 and v3 versions identify with the well-known later form (HG-K4A) so should probably be separately encoded as K004A.



(To list - I expect Michael will be pleased to receive more detailed feedback on specifics from Egyptologists and other as requested in N4741 section 5).



Bob



From: Mark-Jan Nederhof<mailto:mn31 at st-andrews.ac.uk>
Sent: 19 September 2016 12:21
To: Egyptian Hieroglyphs in the UCS<mailto:egyptian at evertype.com>
Subject: Re: [Egyptian] Preliminary proposal to encode M?ller's Egyptian Hieroglyphs in the SMP of the UCS



With the 1071 signs in Unicode, there may at present be roughly two ways of
encoding texts:

(1) There are not-quite-so-serious users like me who, perhaps from a misplaced
sense of being principled, refuse to use dubious, ill-documented,
ill-standardized sign lists derived from the Hieroglyphica, and who therefore
only use the Unicode set, as that is at least stable. Whenever they come
across a sign that is not in Unicode, they have to use a place holder. (I then
tend to use a question mark in my encoding, with a footnote describing what
the sign depicts.)

(2) Then there are serious users, like TLA and Ramses, who cannot afford to
leave place holders in their encoding. They use one from an infinite supply of
extended sets, and won't bother with Unicode, because that is much too
restrictive. They realise fully well of course what is wrong with the extended
sets, but at present there is no other alternative given their requirements.

Neither of these types of users is happy with the status quo. The solution
could be a thoroughly designed extended set in Unicode, properly researched
and documented.  A solid list is in the making, in the form of the
Thot sign list.  The problem is that this takes time and a lot of effort, and
apparently some people are not patient enough to wait for the project to be
completed, or at least for the project to be advanced enough to cover most
signs.

So what is to be done in the short term? For the people in (2) only
a very comprehensive collection of signs in Unicode will suffice, and
make them switch from their own sign lists to Unicode. But this is not
forthcoming. For the people in (1), what would help tremendously are
incremental additions with the most frequent signs not yet in Unicode.
The most frequent signs also happen to be the ones that are best understood.
But incremental additions cost extra time and detract from the purpose of
building a more complete set.

In contrast, random small additions will be pointless and even harmful, because:

* Adding rare signs will not noticeably decrease the frequency of having
to leave place holders while encoding typical texts.

* The more unbalanced a sign list is, the more difficult it is for users to find their
way, and choose the most appropriate signs for an encoding.

* Premature additions may interfere with more additions later. Thorough and
systematic investigations will be needed for deciding between say graphical
variants and characters, and these investigations benefit from having a broad
view over the collection of signs in a comprehensive collection of texts, so
that the most appropriate choice can be made which shapes deserve to become
code points and be representatives of a range of variants.

Trying to fish accidental glyphs from Moeller that, probably for good reason,
didn't make their way into the Gardiner set leads exactly to an addition that
we don't need.  Sure, some font designers who have nothing better to do will
be happy to be able to draw a few more signs for their Unicode fonts, but the
extension will have zero benefit for people who are actually encoding texts.

What further bothers me is a repetition of mistakes from the past. What we
need is not only cross references, but a thorough and justified description of
what signs depict and mean. Only then can one answer the question how a sign
relates to other signs. I'm reminded of e.g. sign L008, a hapax sign (only one
obscure occurrence is known, with uncertain reading) that has been put under
the insects, for no reason that anyone can remember, and probably incorrectly.
Such things should never have happened. But if the same procedures are
followed for the next addition to the Unicode sign list, such calamities will
happen again.

By including even signs from Moeller that are in footnotes one is scraping the
barrel. Are we really so desperate to add as many signs as possible, no matter
for how bad a reason?

For example, 13458 refers to v3p4n1, a footnote for Moeller 36, which is
clearly identifiable with Gardiner A008. Those who can read German see that
the footnote says that the dots above the sign in some graphical variants are
"filler points", and that the sign should _not_ be associated with another
sign that is not known from hieratic, and that other sign I would read as the
man sowing seeds (A060), an existing sign. Why then that 13458 is proposed as
addition is beyond me.

As I wrote earlier, you need to analyse the meaning of signs. Only then can
you make informed decisions whether a sign is new. In many cases this requires
expert knowledge of hieratic and/or looking at signs in context in the
original hieratic documents. Two examples I spotted during superficial inspection:

* Consider 13482 for Moeller 257. If this is _not_ K4 (as it obviously is
according to Goedicke and the reading "XA" in Moeller) then you need to
explain why not. What reading, use or purpose would set this sign apart from
this or any other existing sign?

* I suspect all of us may have made wrong guesses based on appearances.  For
example, A051 for Moeller 27 (here proposed as a new sign 13452) may be wrong.
Goedicke associates this with A042 instead. Because A51 and A42 share some
uses, e.g. first-person ending, looking at one or two occurrences in hieratic
texts may not even suffice to decide which is which.

Are we aware that obtaining any certainty on such matters will require serious
effort? Then the next question is, is it worth it? Or does it do more harm
than good?

Mark-Jan

On Friday 16 Sep 2016 14:58:19 Deborah W. Anderson wrote:
> Dear list members,
> Michael has submitted a preliminary proposal for additional characters,
> building on what he circulated at the Cambridge meeting.
> The document is located at:
> http://www.unicode.org/L2/L2016/16250-n4741-moller-egyptian.pdf
>
> I have sent it on to the group at Mainz, and they will be able to comment on
> it by early October. I have also send it to Barbara L?scher in Basel.
>
> The proposal document mentions: "Experts are needed to carefully check
> Vervloesem's suggested mappings against Nederhof's
> and Richmond's suggested mappings."
>
> To assist in this endeavor, I created a spreadsheet showing the suggested
> mappings by Vervloesem, Richmond, and Nederhof for the newly proposed
> characters, as well as other characters in Moeller.
>
> The Excel spreadsheet is available at:
> http://www.unicode.org/L2/L2016/16251-n4742-moller-mapping.xlsx
> FYI: Grey highlighting in the spreadsheet indicates the newly proposed
> characters for which Vervloesem, Richmond, and/or Nederhof have proposed a
> mapping to Gardiner (/Unicode).
> Yellow highlighting indicates newly proposed characters for which there is
> no proposed mapping.
>
> A document describing the spreadsheet is posted at:
> http://www.unicode.org/L2/L2016/16251-n4742-moller-mapping.pdf  . (This
> document contains the spreadsheet but in very tiny print.)
>
> Let me know if there are others whom you suggest I send this message to.
>
> With best wishes,
> Debbie
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Egyptian mailing list
> Egyptian at evertype.com
> http://evertype.com/mailman/listinfo/egyptian_evertype.com


_______________________________________________
Egyptian mailing list
Egyptian at evertype.com
http://evertype.com/mailman/listinfo/egyptian_evertype.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://evertype.com/pipermail/egyptian_evertype.com/attachments/20160922/98e456aa/attachment.htm>

From bobqq at live.co.uk  Mon Sep 26 13:21:12 2016
From: bobqq at live.co.uk (Bob Richmond)
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 12:21:12 +0000
Subject: [Egyptian] Testing hieroglyphic web fonts on your web browser
Message-ID: <HE1PR1001MB1067CEF6A480B5C6072BBAB991CD0@HE1PR1001MB1067.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>

Web fonts can be very useful.

So I've created a Browser Test Page for Hieroglyphic in Unicode development<http://www.egpz.com/Page/UnicodeDevTest> to make it simple to check if your web browser works. Billions of devices are fine but I?d like to know of any problems members of the group may have using web fonts so I?d appreciate if people could give it a try.

More about web fonts on my blog post Unicode Hieroglyphs in web browsers: Web Fonts<http://hieroglyphseverywhere.blogspot.co.uk/2016/09/unicode-hieroglyphs-in-web-browsers-web.html>.

Thanks,
Bob





-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://evertype.com/pipermail/egyptian_evertype.com/attachments/20160926/7cabc227/attachment.htm>

From frederic.grosshans at gmail.com  Mon Sep 26 13:47:46 2016
From: frederic.grosshans at gmail.com (=?UTF-8?Q?Fr=c3=a9d=c3=a9ric_Grosshans?=)
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 14:47:46 +0200
Subject: [Egyptian] Testing hieroglyphic web fonts on your web browser
In-Reply-To: <HE1PR1001MB1067CEF6A480B5C6072BBAB991CD0@HE1PR1001MB1067.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
References: <HE1PR1001MB1067CEF6A480B5C6072BBAB991CD0@HE1PR1001MB1067.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
Message-ID: <26840f08-9eca-c86b-392f-944a06327904@gmail.com>

Le 26/09/2016 ? 14:21, Bob Richmond a ?crit :
> So I've created aBrowser Test Page for Hieroglyphic in Unicode 
> development <http://www.egpz.com/Page/UnicodeDevTest>to make it simple 
> to check if your web browser works.
The correct address is http://www.egpz.org/Page/UnicodeDevTest

    Fr?d?ric




From bobqq at live.co.uk  Mon Sep 26 14:05:06 2016
From: bobqq at live.co.uk (Bob Richmond)
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 13:05:06 +0000
Subject: [Egyptian] Testing hieroglyphic web fonts on your web browser
In-Reply-To: <26840f08-9eca-c86b-392f-944a06327904@gmail.com>
References: <HE1PR1001MB1067CEF6A480B5C6072BBAB991CD0@HE1PR1001MB1067.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>,
 <26840f08-9eca-c86b-392f-944a06327904@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <HE1PR1001MB10674A41D0A09718C2B4640E91CD0@HE1PR1001MB1067.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>

Ooops. Indeed the clickable link is Browser Test Page for Hieroglyphic in Unicode development<http://www.egpz.org/Page/UnicodeDevTest>. The blog link was ok.



Thanks, Bob









From: Fr?d?ric Grosshans<mailto:frederic.grosshans at gmail.com>
Sent: 26 September 2016 13:50
To: egyptian at evertype.com<mailto:egyptian at evertype.com>
Subject: Re: [Egyptian] Testing hieroglyphic web fonts on your web browser



Le 26/09/2016 ? 14:21, Bob Richmond a ?crit :
> So I've created aBrowser Test Page for Hieroglyphic in Unicode
> development <http://www.egpz.com/Page/UnicodeDevTest>to make it simple
> to check if your web browser works.
The correct address is http://www.egpz.org/Page/UnicodeDevTest

    Fr?d?ric


_______________________________________________
Egyptian mailing list
Egyptian at evertype.com
http://evertype.com/mailman/listinfo/egyptian_evertype.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://evertype.com/pipermail/egyptian_evertype.com/attachments/20160926/729d26f6/attachment.htm>

From ncs3 at cam.ac.uk  Mon Sep 26 14:10:12 2016
From: ncs3 at cam.ac.uk (Nigel Strudwick)
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 14:10:12 +0100
Subject: [Egyptian] Testing hieroglyphic web fonts on your web browser
In-Reply-To: <HE1PR1001MB1067CEF6A480B5C6072BBAB991CD0@HE1PR1001MB1067.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
References: <HE1PR1001MB1067CEF6A480B5C6072BBAB991CD0@HE1PR1001MB1067.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
Message-ID: <DA874869-BC58-4FC3-BF33-154D7CCE6EE4@cam.ac.uk>

Bob

It would be really good for you to have an annotated page to show how it works. A lot of stuff is in external files that I cannot easily see, one of the curses of the modern web. And there is a hfref for href I think?

Nigel



On 26 Sep 2016, at 13:21, Bob Richmond <bobqq at live.co.uk> wrote:

> Web fonts can be very useful.
>  
> So I've created a Browser Test Page for Hieroglyphic in Unicode development to make it simple to check if your web browser works. Billions of devices are fine but I?d like to know of any problems members of the group may have using web fonts so I?d appreciate if people could give it a try.
>  
> More about web fonts on my blog post Unicode Hieroglyphs in web browsers: Web Fonts.
>  
> Thanks,
> Bob
>  
>  
>  
>  
>  
> _______________________________________________
> Egyptian mailing list
> Egyptian at evertype.com
> http://evertype.com/mailman/listinfo/egyptian_evertype.com




From bobqq at live.co.uk  Mon Sep 26 15:06:09 2016
From: bobqq at live.co.uk (Bob Richmond)
Date: Mon, 26 Sep 2016 14:06:09 +0000
Subject: [Egyptian] Testing hieroglyphic web fonts on your web browser
In-Reply-To: <DA874869-BC58-4FC3-BF33-154D7CCE6EE4@cam.ac.uk>
References: <HE1PR1001MB1067CEF6A480B5C6072BBAB991CD0@HE1PR1001MB1067.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>,
 <DA874869-BC58-4FC3-BF33-154D7CCE6EE4@cam.ac.uk>
Message-ID: <HE1PR1001MB1067EBF3AAB67A367C31B28191CD0@HE1PR1001MB1067.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>



hfref fixed. Thanks Nigel.



I?ve had to figure out the best way forward now demands for column writing and rare quadrat forms have delayed adding basic hieroglyph writing to the Unicode standard for another year.



My first step is to make sure people on this list can use appropriate web fonts for which its sufficient to be able to read the Westcar extract on Browser Test Page for Hieroglyphic in Unicode development<http://www.egpz.org/Page/UnicodeDevTest>. Yes, annotated pages would be useful additions and I?ll document how this ?pre-standard? system works when time permits.



Bob



From: Nigel Strudwick<mailto:ncs3 at cam.ac.uk>
Sent: 26 September 2016 14:12
To: Egyptian Hieroglyphs in the UCS<mailto:egyptian at evertype.com>
Subject: Re: [Egyptian] Testing hieroglyphic web fonts on your web browser



Bob

It would be really good for you to have an annotated page to show how it works. A lot of stuff is in external files that I cannot easily see, one of the curses of the modern web. And there is a hfref for href I think?

Nigel



On 26 Sep 2016, at 13:21, Bob Richmond <bobqq at live.co.uk> wrote:

> Web fonts can be very useful.
>
> So I've created a Browser Test Page for Hieroglyphic in Unicode development to make it simple to check if your web browser works. Billions of devices are fine but I?d like to know of any problems members of the group may have using web fonts so I?d appreciate if people could give it a try.
>
> More about web fonts on my blog post Unicode Hieroglyphs in web browsers: Web Fonts.
>
> Thanks,
> Bob
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Egyptian mailing list
> Egyptian at evertype.com
> http://evertype.com/mailman/listinfo/egyptian_evertype.com


_______________________________________________
Egyptian mailing list
Egyptian at evertype.com
http://evertype.com/mailman/listinfo/egyptian_evertype.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://evertype.com/pipermail/egyptian_evertype.com/attachments/20160926/891d62c3/attachment.htm>

From ishida at w3.org  Tue Sep 27 08:41:11 2016
From: ishida at w3.org (r12a)
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2016 08:41:11 +0100
Subject: [Egyptian] Testing hieroglyphic web fonts on your web browser
In-Reply-To: <HE1PR1001MB1067CEF6A480B5C6072BBAB991CD0@HE1PR1001MB1067.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
References: <HE1PR1001MB1067CEF6A480B5C6072BBAB991CD0@HE1PR1001MB1067.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
Message-ID: <0b75afed-a47f-655e-962c-00fdc6f04e30@w3.org>

On 26/09/2016 13:21, Bob Richmond wrote:
> So I've created a Browser Test Page for Hieroglyphic in Unicode
> development <http://www.egpz.com/Page/UnicodeDevTest>to make it simple
> to check if your web browser works. Billions of devices are fine but I?d
> like to know of any problems members of the group may have using web
> fonts so I?d appreciate if people could give it a try.

>
> More about web fonts on my blog post Unicode Hieroglyphs in web
> browsers: Web Fonts
> <http://hieroglyphseverywhere.blogspot.co.uk/2016/09/unicode-hieroglyphs-in-web-browsers-web.html>.

hello Bob,

i'm not clear about what the page is meant to be testing.

is the page intended to check whether a user can see hieroglyphs using 
the web font, or that they can see them arranged in quadrats, or both?

i see all the characters, but i can't tell whether that's because i have 
a couple of hieroglyphic fonts already on my system, or whether the 
webfont is providing the glyphs (except for the glyph with a green 
background).  (I also looked at the source briefly, but couldn't see any 
@font-face rule, and the descriptions of the page in your blog and 
emails don't mention what web font is being used. I'd like to know what 
font was used.)

i also see the characters arranged in quadrats, but i don't know whether 
what i'm seeing is fully correct. If the quadrat behaviour is something 
your page is testing, i suggest that you include images of the expected 
outcome, so that people can compare their results with the expectations.

it's also not clear in the descriptions whether the quadrat behaviour is 
produced by the web font or scripting.  I suspect it's the latter. It 
would be good to make that clear.

finally, it may also be useful for the reader to indicate that you are 
using the U+F510F [Supplementary Private Use Area-A] code point to 
represent glyph with the green background, rather than simply an 
alternate font glyph for U+13139 EGYPTIAN HIEROGLYPH F051.

hope that helps,
ri







From runa.uei at gmail.com  Tue Sep 27 10:26:39 2016
From: runa.uei at gmail.com (So Miyagawa)
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2016 11:26:39 +0200
Subject: [Egyptian] Testing hieroglyphic web fonts on your web browser
In-Reply-To: <0b75afed-a47f-655e-962c-00fdc6f04e30@w3.org>
References: <HE1PR1001MB1067CEF6A480B5C6072BBAB991CD0@HE1PR1001MB1067.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
 <0b75afed-a47f-655e-962c-00fdc6f04e30@w3.org>
Message-ID: <CAHetP1fRJcPOojwEuZiNe8_Bhr0C6j0YsYhPf1pBPn5gtdFRBQ@mail.gmail.com>

Thanks Bob,

That's cool. So, you made a web font for Hieroglyphic Egyptian Unicode,
right? Coptic SCRIPTORIUM, which I'm working for, developed the web font
version of Antinoou the Coptic font. It has been really beneficial to our
web corpus because the users do not need a specific Coptic Unicode font in
their local environments if you use the web font on your homepage.

I have a question: what does the Unicode character like three circles do?
it does not appear in the surface text on the browser but exists in the
code as the photo below. Does it function as an operator of the
vertical arrangement? Seemingly it does. Is it your own development?

?


Best,
So

________________________________

So Miyagawa
[so? mij??g?w?]

Georg-August-Universit?t G?ttingen (Egyptology &
Coptology, Ph.D. candidate), SFB1136 "Bildung und Religion in Kulturen
des Mittelmeerraums und seiner Umwelt
von der Antike bis zum Mittelalter und
zum Klassischen Islam" (Research Fellow), KELLIA (Research Fellow),
Coptic SCRIPTORIUM (Research Member), Unicode Consortium (Student Member)
Kyoto University (Linguistics, Ph.D. candidate)

SFB1136: https://www.uni-goettingen.de/de/531081.html
CV: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1HhhKovsJzqZQGCn6W1oNweqyqKYUf
UvFTxAlStKICdM/edit?usp=sharing
Academia.edu: https://uni-goettingen.academia.edu/SoMiyagawa

?????????? ??????-???????? ??????????? ??????, ?????? ?????? ??????????
???-???? ??????-?????????, ?????-??????? ??????? ???????? ????????,
????????? ????????;

"But the king of Assyria found treachery in Hoshea, for he had sent
messengers to So, king of Egypt, and offered no tribute to the king of
Assyria, as he had done year by year ." (2 Kings 17:4, ESV)

On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 9:41 AM, r12a <ishida at w3.org> wrote:

> On 26/09/2016 13:21, Bob Richmond wrote:
>
>> So I've created a Browser Test Page for Hieroglyphic in Unicode
>> development <http://www.egpz.com/Page/UnicodeDevTest>to make it simple
>> to check if your web browser works. Billions of devices are fine but I?d
>> like to know of any problems members of the group may have using web
>> fonts so I?d appreciate if people could give it a try.
>>
>
>
>> More about web fonts on my blog post Unicode Hieroglyphs in web
>> browsers: Web Fonts
>> <http://hieroglyphseverywhere.blogspot.co.uk/2016/09/unicode
>> -hieroglyphs-in-web-browsers-web.html>.
>>
>
> hello Bob,
>
> i'm not clear about what the page is meant to be testing.
>
> is the page intended to check whether a user can see hieroglyphs using the
> web font, or that they can see them arranged in quadrats, or both?
>
> i see all the characters, but i can't tell whether that's because i have a
> couple of hieroglyphic fonts already on my system, or whether the webfont
> is providing the glyphs (except for the glyph with a green background).  (I
> also looked at the source briefly, but couldn't see any @font-face rule,
> and the descriptions of the page in your blog and emails don't mention what
> web font is being used. I'd like to know what font was used.)
>
> i also see the characters arranged in quadrats, but i don't know whether
> what i'm seeing is fully correct. If the quadrat behaviour is something
> your page is testing, i suggest that you include images of the expected
> outcome, so that people can compare their results with the expectations.
>
> it's also not clear in the descriptions whether the quadrat behaviour is
> produced by the web font or scripting.  I suspect it's the latter. It would
> be good to make that clear.
>
> finally, it may also be useful for the reader to indicate that you are
> using the U+F510F [Supplementary Private Use Area-A] code point to
> represent glyph with the green background, rather than simply an alternate
> font glyph for U+13139 EGYPTIAN HIEROGLYPH F051.
>
> hope that helps,
> ri
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Egyptian mailing list
> Egyptian at evertype.com
> http://evertype.com/mailman/listinfo/egyptian_evertype.com
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://evertype.com/pipermail/egyptian_evertype.com/attachments/20160927/5f696671/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Screen Shot 2016-09-27 at 11.15.17.png
Type: image/png
Size: 110345 bytes
Desc: not available
URL: <http://evertype.com/pipermail/egyptian_evertype.com/attachments/20160927/5f696671/attachment.png>

From ishida at w3.org  Tue Sep 27 11:05:27 2016
From: ishida at w3.org (r12a)
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2016 11:05:27 +0100
Subject: [Egyptian] Testing hieroglyphic web fonts on your web browser
In-Reply-To: <CAHetP1fRJcPOojwEuZiNe8_Bhr0C6j0YsYhPf1pBPn5gtdFRBQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <HE1PR1001MB1067CEF6A480B5C6072BBAB991CD0@HE1PR1001MB1067.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
 <0b75afed-a47f-655e-962c-00fdc6f04e30@w3.org>
 <CAHetP1fRJcPOojwEuZiNe8_Bhr0C6j0YsYhPf1pBPn5gtdFRBQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <d52f47ce-dfad-4def-b4bc-cc3f3b0b773d@w3.org>

On 27/09/2016 10:26, So Miyagawa wrote:
> I have a question: what does the Unicode character like three circles
> do? it does not appear in the surface text on the browser but exists in
> the code as the photo below. Does it function as an operator of the
> vertical arrangement? Seemingly it does. Is it your own development?

pasting the string into UniView[1], it seems that this is U+130CB 
EGYPTIAN HIEROGLYPH D067B.  Hmm, i'd have expected any unsupported 
invisible operator characters to be in the private use area, rather than 
repurposing existing Unicode code points.

ri



[1] 
https://r12a.github.io/uniview/?charlist=%F0%93%85%AF%F0%93%84%BF%F0%93%82%A7%F0%93%83%8B%F0%93%88%92%F0%93%8F%A4%F0%93%8F%A4%F0%93%82%9C%F0%93%87%93%F0%93%86%A4%F0%93%8D%B9%F0%93%82%A6%F0%93%83%8B%F0%93%82%8B%F0%93%8F%9B%F0%93%8D%BA%F0%93%8C%B4%F0%93%83%8B%F0%93%90%99%F0%93%82%9D%F0%93%8A%A4%F0%93%8F%B2%F0%93%80%81%F0%93%8E%9B%F0%93%88%96%F0%93%83%8B%F0%93%82%9D%F0%93%82%9D%F0%93%83%8B%F0%93%82%8B%F0%93%83%8B%F0%93%8F%8F%F0%93%82%9D%F0%93%83%8B%F0%93%8F%8F%F0%93%83%8A%F0%93%8F%B2%F0%93%8D%B2%F0%93%83%8B%F0%93%88%96%F0%93%8B%B4&char=130CB



From bobqq at live.co.uk  Tue Sep 27 11:33:41 2016
From: bobqq at live.co.uk (Bob Richmond)
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2016 10:33:41 +0000
Subject: [Egyptian] Testing hieroglyphic web fonts on your web browser
Message-ID: <HE1PR1001MB106773DCB37CFDF039D711D991CC0@HE1PR1001MB1067.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>

Thanks Richard

@font-face is defined in site.css and the quadrats are implemented by GSUB rules in the font (which is just a temporary font like the I&E demo font I circulated in the summer - it will change when I?ve made the full-fat version in the not too distant).

Its testing whether the text displays as expected. No scripting, pure web font. A tester doesn?t need to know how for this purpose, only whether it works! I?ve update the page to show expected outcome.

The question of alternate glyphs or code points for various characters is an upcoming repertoire discussion. I hope to release Plane 15 guidance and fonts I?m using (based on Aegyptus) when time permits but higher priority is items of interest to UTC for their next meeting in a months time.

Bob

From: r12a<mailto:ishida at w3.org>
Sent: 27 September 2016 08:43
To: Egyptian Hieroglyphs in the UCS<mailto:egyptian at evertype.com>
Subject: Re: [Egyptian] Testing hieroglyphic web fonts on your web browser

hello Bob,

i'm not clear about what the page is meant to be testing.

is the page intended to check whether a user can see hieroglyphs using
the web font, or that they can see them arranged in quadrats, or both?

i see all the characters, but i can't tell whether that's because i have
a couple of hieroglyphic fonts already on my system, or whether the
webfont is providing the glyphs (except for the glyph with a green
background).  (I also looked at the source briefly, but couldn't see any
@font-face rule, and the descriptions of the page in your blog and
emails don't mention what web font is being used. I'd like to know what
font was used.)

i also see the characters arranged in quadrats, but i don't know whether
what i'm seeing is fully correct. If the quadrat behaviour is something
your page is testing, i suggest that you include images of the expected
outcome, so that people can compare their results with the expectations.

it's also not clear in the descriptions whether the quadrat behaviour is
produced by the web font or scripting.  I suspect it's the latter. It
would be good to make that clear.

finally, it may also be useful for the reader to indicate that you are
using the U+F510F [Supplementary Private Use Area-A] code point to
represent glyph with the green background, rather than simply an
alternate font glyph for U+13139 EGYPTIAN HIEROGLYPH F051.

hope that helps,
ri





_______________________________________________
Egyptian mailing list
Egyptian at evertype.com
http://evertype.com/mailman/listinfo/egyptian_evertype.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://evertype.com/pipermail/egyptian_evertype.com/attachments/20160927/e20ff81b/attachment.htm>

From bobqq at live.co.uk  Tue Sep 27 11:44:53 2016
From: bobqq at live.co.uk (Bob Richmond)
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2016 10:44:53 +0000
Subject: [Egyptian] Testing hieroglyphic web fonts on your web browser
In-Reply-To: <CAHetP1fRJcPOojwEuZiNe8_Bhr0C6j0YsYhPf1pBPn5gtdFRBQ@mail.gmail.com>
References: <HE1PR1001MB1067CEF6A480B5C6072BBAB991CD0@HE1PR1001MB1067.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
 <0b75afed-a47f-655e-962c-00fdc6f04e30@w3.org>,
 <CAHetP1fRJcPOojwEuZiNe8_Bhr0C6j0YsYhPf1pBPn5gtdFRBQ@mail.gmail.com>
Message-ID: <HE1PR1001MB1067E86C8E7E83CAB961F7DF91CC0@HE1PR1001MB1067.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>


Hi So

Like I&E demo font I circulated in July, I?m using heqat-number code points for the control characters because OpenType rendering usually requires fake control characters to be in the defined Egyptian Hieroglyphs block at U+13000 ? U+1342E. I can?t use Plane 15 characters. A necessary evil and one we are probably stuck with for a good  until rare quadrat encoding is sorted out to enable approval of proper control characters.

MdC does not define Heqat-numbers as units so this fudge doesn?t usually give grief in carefully controlled scenarios.

Bob


From: So Miyagawa<mailto:runa.uei at gmail.com>
Sent: 27 September 2016 10:28
To: Egyptian Hieroglyphs in the UCS<mailto:egyptian at evertype.com>
Subject: Re: [Egyptian] Testing hieroglyphic web fonts on your web browser

Thanks Bob,

That's cool. So, you made a web font for Hieroglyphic Egyptian Unicode, right? Coptic SCRIPTORIUM, which I'm working for, developed the web font version of Antinoou the Coptic font. It has been really beneficial to our web corpus because the users do not need a specific Coptic Unicode font in their local environments if you use the web font on your homepage.

I have a question: what does the Unicode character like three circles do? it does not appear in the surface text on the browser but exists in the code as the photo below. Does it function as an operator of the vertical arrangement? Seemingly it does. Is it your own development?
[cid:ii_itl9r5iy0_1576aeec3a337f6d]
?


Best,
So

________________________________

So Miyagawa
[so? mij??g?w?]

Georg-August-Universit?t G?ttingen (Egyptology &
Coptology, Ph.D. candidate), SFB1136 "Bildung und Religion in Kulturen
des Mittelmeerraums und seiner Umwelt
von der Antike bis zum Mittelalter und
zum Klassischen Islam" (Research Fellow), KELLIA (Research Fellow),
Coptic SCRIPTORIUM (Research Member), Unicode Consortium (Student Member)
Kyoto University (Linguistics, Ph.D. candidate)

SFB1136: https://www.uni-goettingen.de/de/531081.html
CV: https://docs.google.com/document/d/1HhhKovsJzqZQGCn6W1oNweqyqKYUfUvFTxAlStKICdM/edit?usp=sharing
Academia.edu: https://uni-goettingen.academia.edu/SoMiyagawa

?????????? ??????-???????? ??????????? ??????, ?????? ?????? ?????????? ???-???? ??????-?????????, ?????-??????? ??????? ???????? ????????, ????????? ????????;

"But the king of Assyria found treachery in Hoshea, for he had sent messengers to So, king of Egypt, and offered no tribute to the king of Assyria, as he had done year by year ." (2 Kings 17:4, ESV)

On Tue, Sep 27, 2016 at 9:41 AM, r12a <ishida at w3.org<mailto:ishida at w3.org>> wrote:
On 26/09/2016 13:21, Bob Richmond wrote:
So I've created a Browser Test Page for Hieroglyphic in Unicode
development <http://www.egpz.com/Page/UnicodeDevTest>to make it simple
to check if your web browser works. Billions of devices are fine but I?d
like to know of any problems members of the group may have using web
fonts so I?d appreciate if people could give it a try.


More about web fonts on my blog post Unicode Hieroglyphs in web
browsers: Web Fonts
<http://hieroglyphseverywhere.blogspot.co.uk/2016/09/unicode-hieroglyphs-in-web-browsers-web.html>.

hello Bob,

i'm not clear about what the page is meant to be testing.

is the page intended to check whether a user can see hieroglyphs using the web font, or that they can see them arranged in quadrats, or both?

i see all the characters, but i can't tell whether that's because i have a couple of hieroglyphic fonts already on my system, or whether the webfont is providing the glyphs (except for the glyph with a green background).  (I also looked at the source briefly, but couldn't see any @font-face rule, and the descriptions of the page in your blog and emails don't mention what web font is being used. I'd like to know what font was used.)

i also see the characters arranged in quadrats, but i don't know whether what i'm seeing is fully correct. If the quadrat behaviour is something your page is testing, i suggest that you include images of the expected outcome, so that people can compare their results with the expectations.

it's also not clear in the descriptions whether the quadrat behaviour is produced by the web font or scripting.  I suspect it's the latter. It would be good to make that clear.

finally, it may also be useful for the reader to indicate that you are using the U+F510F [Supplementary Private Use Area-A] code point to represent glyph with the green background, rather than simply an alternate font glyph for U+13139 EGYPTIAN HIEROGLYPH F051.

hope that helps,
ri






_______________________________________________
Egyptian mailing list
Egyptian at evertype.com<mailto:Egyptian at evertype.com>
http://evertype.com/mailman/listinfo/egyptian_evertype.com

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://evertype.com/pipermail/egyptian_evertype.com/attachments/20160927/0d86381d/attachment.htm>
-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: Screen Shot 2016-09-27 at 11.15.17.png
Type: image/png
Size: 110345 bytes
Desc: Screen Shot 2016-09-27 at 11.15.17.png
URL: <http://evertype.com/pipermail/egyptian_evertype.com/attachments/20160927/0d86381d/attachment.png>

From ishida at w3.org  Tue Sep 27 13:19:58 2016
From: ishida at w3.org (r12a)
Date: Tue, 27 Sep 2016 13:19:58 +0100
Subject: [Egyptian] Testing hieroglyphic web fonts on your web browser
In-Reply-To: <HE1PR1001MB106773DCB37CFDF039D711D991CC0@HE1PR1001MB1067.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
References: <HE1PR1001MB106773DCB37CFDF039D711D991CC0@HE1PR1001MB1067.EURPRD10.PROD.OUTLOOK.COM>
Message-ID: <72d71b40-20b7-7ef9-0a0c-ff91e4e60e9c@w3.org>

On 27/09/2016 11:33, Bob Richmond wrote:
> @font-face is defined in site.css

oh, i'm surprised that works.  Iirc, it normally has to be at the top of 
the style sheet in order to be recognised by the CSS parser.


ri