From mboxrd@z Thu Jan 1 00:00:00 1970 X-Spam-Checker-Version: SpamAssassin 3.4.4 (2020-01-24) on polar.synack.me X-Spam-Level: X-Spam-Status: No, score=-1.3 required=5.0 tests=BAYES_00,INVALID_MSGID autolearn=no autolearn_force=no version=3.4.4 X-Google-Language: ENGLISH,ASCII-7-bit X-Google-Thread: 103376,5b811babbc7e6a7a X-Google-Attributes: gid103376,public From: eachus@spectre.mitre.org (Robert I. Eachus) Subject: Re: Int. letters & is_basic Date: 1996/02/19 Message-ID: #1/1 X-Deja-AN: 140127578 distribution: world references: <4g0vtl$80a@toads.pgh.pa.us> organization: The Mitre Corp., Bedford, MA. newsgroups: comp.lang.ada Date: 1996-02-19T00:00:00+00:00 List-Id: In article <4g2pdc$15lc@watnews1.watson.ibm.com> ncohen@watson.ibm.com (Norman H. Cohen) writes: > No, he is saying that the ring in a_ring and the oblique stroke in > o_oblique_stroke are not diacritical marks, any more than the diagonal in > "R" is a diacritical mark placed on a "P". They are distinct Norwegian > letters. As far as I know, there is no language in which the ring and > the oblique stroke occur as diacritical marks. They are treated as such in English! And, yes, both angstrom and oersted occur in my English dictionary as units of measure. (Excuse the spellings, I don't want to have to create a MIME message and post it.) Someone with the OED on disk might try checking to see if there are ANY letters in the Latin-1 set which don't occur there. There are, of course, letters in English and the OED that don't occur in the Latin-1 set. The most obvious of these is the OE dipthong found in encyclopedia. (It was there in earlier drafts but was replaced by Multiplication_Sign and Division_Sign. If you care. ;-) > This can and should be fixed by a binding interpretation of the ARG. This can and should be fixed only by providing culture specific packages. -- Robert I. Eachus with Standard_Disclaimer; use Standard_Disclaimer; function Message (Text: in Clever_Ideas) return Better_Ideas is...