On 29/04/2011 11:29 AM, Steve Slevinski wrote:
[log in to unmask]" type="cite">Hi Jonathan and list,

I am making a small change that will only affect programmers and back end data.

We are almost off the bleeding edge.  The Unicode proposal requires a change to the SignPuddle data.  After this change, I do not plan any additional changes.  A future and final conversion may be needed for a Unicode compromise agreement.  No changes are planned for the ISWA 2010 itself.

I will be updating my documents, code libraries, and test data over the next few days.

The primary change moves the fill and rotation codepoints 14 ahead into different code chart rows.  This leaves 14 spaces for new root symbols to be added in future proposals.  Fill codepoints will start at U+1DA9A and Rotation codepoints will start at U+IDAA0.  If a Unicode string for a symbol is 3 codepoints long, the 1st character remains the same, but the 2nd and 3rd will change.   Each will advance 14 codepoints.

Michael Everson made this change in the Unicode proposal.  It's a good change, so I'm including it in the SignPuddle online data conversion.
This sounds like a good improvement to me too.
[log in to unmask]" type="cite">
He is writing a new draft that affects the Unicode world but not the SignWriting world.  All hand root symbols will appear using the first (empty) palm facing for Unicode code charts.  The new draft isn't ready yet, but Michael's previous draft is online.

A secondary change in the proposal is regarding character count, but will not affect the proposed symbol strings that I use.  Instead of proposing 674 new codepoints, we will be proposing 672.  This compromise will leave holes in the code charts for fill-1 and rotation-1.  Unicode strings for symbols will assume fill-1 if a symbol string does not include a fill characters, and assume rotation-1 if a symbol string does not include a rotation character.  A proposed symbol string will be 1, 2, or 3 characters long.  If approved by the Unicode committees, we will achieve 99.7% of the goal and take a huge step forward in standardization.
Why are they proposing to remove fill-1 and rotation-1 codepoints?  Are they assuming that these fills and rotations are used more often and could therefore save on the length of a document by having symbol of 1 and 2 characters long?  Or what exactly is their motivation?
[log in to unmask]" type="cite">
I will not be removing fill-1 and rotation-1 from the test data.  I consider removal of the fill-1 and rotation-1 as Unicode normalization.  An easy process can search for and deletes these 2 characters wherever they exist.  The undo process is more complicated.

The removal of the fill-1 character breaks sorting and complicates searching.  The easy way to fix sorting is to use the fill-1 character rather than an empty slot.  This solution works for any environment, such as mobile, desktop, web browser, and server.

If the first proposal is successful, I plan to champion a second proposal to add Fill-1 and Rotation-1 as control characters that complete the set.   These characters are useful for programmers.  Fill-1 and Rotation-1 characters facilitate easier, reusable generic code.  They eliminate the need to repeatedly test for and handle exceptions.
So if the first proposal goes through we would have

Fill-2 U+1DA9A
Fill-3 U+1DA9C
Fill-4 U+1DA9D
Fill-5 U+1DA9E
Fill-6 U+1DA9F

Rotation-2  U+IDAA0
Rotation-3  U+IDAA1
Rotation-4  U+IDAA2
Rotation-5 U+IDAA3
Rotation-6  U+IDAA4
Rotation-7  U+IDAA5
Rotation-8  U+IDAA6
Rotation-9 U+IDAA7
Rotation-10  U+IDAA8
Rotation-11  U+IDAA9
Rotation-12  U+IDAAA
Rotation-13  U+IDAAB
Rotation-14  U+IDAAC
Rotation-15 U+IDAAD
Rotation-16  U+IDAAE

Then with the second proposal they would change to this readding the Fill1 and Rotation-1 or where did you intend on re-inserting Fill-1 and Rotation-1?

Fill-1 U+1DA9A
Fill-2 U+1DA9B
Fill-3 U+1DA9C
Fill-4 U+1DA9D
Fill-5 U+1DA9E
Fill-6 U+1DA9F

Rotation-1  U+IDAA0
Rotation-2  U+IDAA1
Rotation-3  U+IDAA2
Rotation-4  U+IDAA3
Rotation-5 U+IDAA4
Rotation-6  U+IDAA5
Rotation-7  U+IDAA6
Rotation-8  U+IDAA7
Rotation-9 U+IDAA8
Rotation-10  U+IDAA9
Rotation-11  U+IDAAA
Rotation-12  U+IDAAB
Rotation-13  U+IDAAC
Rotation-14  U+IDAAD
Rotation-15 U+IDAAE
Rotation-16  U+IDAAF

Not only does the first proposal make it hard sort the entries but it will also be harder to parse because the symbol with sometimes be 1 character long, sometimes 2 and sometimes 3.  So extra checking has do be done to verify if the next character is the start of a new symbol or a fill and or rotation modifier.

[log in to unmask]" type="cite">

[log in to unmask]" type="cite">Regards,
No virus found in this incoming message. Checked by AVG - Version: 9.0.894 / Virus Database: 271.1.1/3604 - Release Date: 04/29/11 00:34:00

                            _                       ____                                     
 /\                        | |                     (|   \                                    
|  |  __   _  _    __, _|_ | |     __,   _  _       |    |        _  _    __   __,   _  _   
|  | /  \_/ |/ |  /  |  |  |/ \   /  |  / |/ |     _|    ||   |  / |/ |  /    /  |  / |/ |  
 \_|/\__/   |  |_/\_/|_/|_/|   |_/\_/|_/  |  |_/  (/\___/  \_/|_/  |  |_/\___/\_/|_/  |  |_/ 

email: [log in to unmask]
         [log in to unmask]
Cel: 9983-1204
Tel: 2213-5285
Skype: yojoduncan

SignWriter Studio