Groups | Search | Server Info | Keyboard shortcuts | Login | Register [http] [https] [nntp] [nntps]
Groups > linux.debian.user > #211813 > unrolled thread
| Started by | peter@easthope.ca |
|---|---|
| First post | 2019-07-28 07:40 +0200 |
| Last post | 2019-08-01 19:20 +0200 |
| Articles | 6 — 5 participants |
Back to article view | Back to linux.debian.user
Magnifying glass character, 🔎. peter@easthope.ca - 2019-07-28 07:40 +0200
Re: Magnifying glass character, 🔎. Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> - 2019-07-28 07:40 +0200
Re: Magnifying glass character, 🔎. Teemu Likonen <tlikonen@iki.fi> - 2019-07-28 07:50 +0200
Re: Magnifying glass character, 🔎. David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2019-07-28 18:10 +0200
Re: Magnifying glass character, 🔎. Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> - 2019-07-28 18:30 +0200
Re: Magnifying glass character, 🔎. David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> - 2019-08-01 19:20 +0200
| From | peter@easthope.ca |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-07-28 07:40 +0200 |
| Subject | Magnifying glass character, 🔎. |
| Message-ID | <yoK4x-4Oj-3@gated-at.bofh.it> |
Does anyone happen to know: is 🔎 a Unicode assigned character or a Debian private use character? Thanks, ... Peter E. -- https://en.wikibooks.org/wiki/Oberon Tel: +1 604 670 0140 Bcc: peter at easthope. ca
[toc] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Reco <recoverym4n@enotuniq.net> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-07-28 07:40 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <yoK4x-4Oj-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #211813 |
Hi. On Sat, Jul 27, 2019 at 09:48:12PM -0700, peter@easthope.ca wrote: > Does anyone happen to know: is 🔎 a Unicode assigned character > or a Debian private use character? https://unicode-table.com/en/1F50E/ It's in Unicode 6.0 standard. Reco
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Teemu Likonen <tlikonen@iki.fi> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-07-28 07:50 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <yoKed-4S1-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #211813 |
[Multipart message — attachments visible in raw view] — view raw
peter@easthope.ca [2019-07-27T21:48:12-07] wrote:
> Does anyone happen to know: is 🔎 a Unicode assigned character
> or a Debian private use character?
Unicode knows, and you can search using this page:
https://www.unicode.org/charts/index.html
Character U+1F50E RIGHT-POINTING MAGNIFYING GLASS is here:
https://www.unicode.org/charts/PDF/U1F300.pdf
--
/// OpenPGP key: 4E1055DC84E9DFF613D78557719D69D324539450
// https://keys.openpgp.org/search?q=tlikonen@iki.fi
/ https://keybase.io/tlikonen https://github.com/tlikonen
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-07-28 18:10 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <yoTUd-2O3-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #211813 |
On Sat 27 Jul 2019 at 21:48:12 (-0700), peter@easthope.ca wrote: > Does anyone happen to know: is 🔎 a Unicode assigned character > or a Debian private use character? Sorry to have ignored the earlier part of your previous post, but I assumed that it was the threading that you cared about and not this particular character. I was just trying to save you time and effort. As others have posted, it's a Unicode character. This reference http://www.ltg.ed.ac.uk/~richard/utf-8.cgi is a useful one to bookmark in your browser. Your subject line is quoting the decimal code point in HTML-speak, but you know all this as you posted it in said previous post. > A clever Unicode supplemental character? Plane 1, the Supplementary Multilingual Plane (SMP) where it's in the Miscellaneous Symbols and Pictographs block. > Does it comply to an RFC or standard? ISO/IEC 10646. > Is it a good notation for the mailing list? > I'd tend to look for someting slimpler. No, particularly in a technical list like this. Most people reading posts as text emails will lack it in their font, so it will probably get displayed as a space, or even something double-width that screws up any intended monospaced layout. But the main point for you, personally, is that your system for sending posts appears to be non-conforming and embeds NULs or 0x80 characters in the text. This mightily screws up some mail readers, so please don't use it. Cheers, David.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | Michael Stone <mstone@debian.org> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-07-28 18:30 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <yoUdz-2V8-5@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #211830 |
On Sun, Jul 28, 2019 at 11:01:33AM -0500, David Wright wrote: >No, particularly in a technical list like this. Most people reading >posts as text emails will lack it in their font, so it will >probably get displayed as a space, or even something double-width >that screws up any intended monospaced layout. Most people running an up to date debian system shouldn't really have problems with it. Terminal choice can be an issue, but there are plenty of terminals available which will display a text MUA and unicode emojis (even in color!) with no problem. >But the main point for you, personally, is that your system for >sending posts appears to be non-conforming and embeds NULs or 0x80 >characters in the text. This mightily screws up some mail readers, >so please don't use it. This is the issue--what he's sending isn't valid unicode because his pre-unicode (and pre-rfc2822) MUA is mangling its input and sending bogus output. It has nothing to do with whether sending valid unicode works.
[toc] | [prev] | [next] | [standalone]
| From | David Wright <deblis@lionunicorn.co.uk> |
|---|---|
| Date | 2019-08-01 19:20 +0200 |
| Message-ID | <yqmU9-1B4-1@gated-at.bofh.it> |
| In reply to | #211831 |
On Sun 28 Jul 2019 at 12:20:51 (-0400), Michael Stone wrote: > On Sun, Jul 28, 2019 at 11:01:33AM -0500, David Wright wrote: > > No, particularly in a technical list like this. Most people reading > > posts as text emails will lack it in their font, so it will > > probably get displayed as a space, or even something double-width > > that screws up any intended monospaced layout. > > Most people running an up to date debian system shouldn't really have > problems with it. Terminal choice can be an issue, but there are > plenty of terminals available which will display a text MUA and > unicode emojis (even in color!) with no problem. I had assumed the problem was with fonts rather than terminals. But I'm happy for you to name some terminal/font combinations that will work. I hope that at least one of these is VC-based, whatever "terminal" means in that context. That said, my own view is that characters from this supplementary plane are unlikely to be satisfactory for a significant number of people, so it's polite to avoid using them. > > But the main point for you, personally, is that your system for > > sending posts appears to be non-conforming and embeds NULs or 0x80 > > characters in the text. This mightily screws up some mail readers, > > so please don't use it. > > This is the issue--what he's sending isn't valid unicode because his > pre-unicode (and pre-rfc2822) MUA is mangling its input and sending > bogus output. It has nothing to do with whether sending valid unicode > works. That's why I posted here a recipe for the OP to cut and paste the Message-ID untouched from a given message into the OP's reply, and then change Message-ID to In-Reply-To. It appears to work ok. I've frequently done this when I've replied to a post that I'd already deleted. (I don't bother with copying all the references.) I don't think it's possible for the OP to post Unicode correctly because their MUA appears unable to construct a Content-Type header. Cheers, David.
[toc] | [prev] | [standalone]
Back to top | Article view | linux.debian.user
csiph-web