dieresis
in [Design]
|
Prev: [Way OT] dieresis
Next: SPDIF to AES/EBU
From: David Brown on 7 Mar 2010 05:41 On 07/03/2010 02:37, JosephKK wrote: > On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 12:10:20 -0800, Fred Abse<excretatauris(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: > >> On Thu, 04 Mar 2010 09:52:05 +0100, David Brown wrote: >> >>> And of course on Linux, you typically have far more >>> combinations directly available, and support for a "compose" key if you >>> need it. >> >> A use for the, otherwise redundant, "Windows" keys. >> >> I have "left windows" as a compose key. >> >> ��� �� wh�t �t d��� ;-) > > Groovy. How did you remap that key so usefully? In Ubuntu, it's System, Preferences, Keyboard, then the Layouts tab and select "Layout Options". On other modern distro's it's probably something similarly logical. If you are using an older or more minimalistic window managers / desktops, there are settings in the X configuration files to get the same effect - the same goes for when working without X. Then you press something like: <compose-shift-T-H> <compose-"-i> <compose-s-s>, etc.
From: JosephKK on 7 Mar 2010 22:14 On Sun, 07 Mar 2010 11:30:18 -0800, Fred Abse <excretatauris(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: >On Sat, 06 Mar 2010 17:37:31 -0800, JosephKK wrote: > >> On Fri, 05 Mar 2010 12:10:20 -0800, Fred Abse >> <excretatauris(a)invalid.invalid> wrote: >> >>>On Thu, 04 Mar 2010 09:52:05 +0100, David Brown wrote: >>> >>>> And of course on Linux, you typically have far more combinations >>>> directly available, and support for a "compose" key if you need it. >>> >>>A use for the, otherwise redundant, "Windows" keys. >>> >>>I have "left windows" as a compose key. >>> >>>Þïß îß whät ìt dõèß ;-) >> >> Groovy. How did you remap that key so usefully? > >You need a hidden file called .Xmodmap in your home directory. Alas, there is not such in my home directory. > >Here's mine: > >! clear caps lock >remove lock = Caps_Lock >add Shift = Caps_Lock >!remap windows key >keycode 115 = Multi_key > > > >"Multi_key" is synonymous with "Compose key" > > >You might want to keep the caps lock, if so, comment out lines 2 & 3 with >a "!" > >Run dumpkeys in an xterm to see the compose key sequences. >A few may not work. > > >I've also gotten a program that you run from .Xclients-default that will put >numlock on when you start X. > >http://freshmeat.net/projects/numlockx What Distro/edition do you use? I am transitioning from opensuse 10.3 to opensuse 11.1. There is a lot of X changes under the hood.
From: Ignacio G. T. on 8 Mar 2010 08:50 El 05/03/2010 12:36, Boudewijn Dijkstra escribi�: > What an American calls a foreign language is to me very ambiguous, > considering the use of Spanish now and in the past, the use of German > before WW1 and also the real indigenous languages! What an American calls an American is also very ambiguous to me. Indeed, most Americans speak Spanish, not English :-)
From: D Yuniskis on 8 Mar 2010 12:52 Hi Joseph, JosephKK wrote: >> I contend that they aren't aware of the "need". How many know how >> (when) to use a semicolon? > > My job requires that i know. I even have my own copy of CMoS. You're an exception. :> Most folks have a hard time figuring out when to use a *comma*!
From: D Yuniskis on 8 Mar 2010 13:02
Hi Boudewijn, Boudewijn Dijkstra wrote: > Op Fri, 05 Mar 2010 00:29:33 +0100 schreef D Yuniskis > <not.going.to.be(a)seen.com>: >> David Brown wrote: >>> D Yuniskis wrote: >>>> David Brown wrote: >>>>> <rant> >>>>> >>>>> For people using Windows with English-language keyboard layouts, it >>>>> is extremely inconvenient to make proper use of diacritical marks >>>>> of any kind - thus people generally don't bother. I have no idea >>>>> why there is such a limitation here - after all, with non-English >>>>> keyboard layouts in Windows you have easy access to the more common >>>>> marks even when they are not part of your language (on my Norwegian >>>>> keyboard, I can easily write >>>> >>>> That goes to the point I was making -- that these "old" >>>> adornments are just no longer used. >>> First off, these "old" adornments, as you call them, are part of the >>> language for many non-English languages, and are very much used - >>> failing to use the correct marks is a spelling mistake. It is only >>> within the English-only world that people think it is acceptable to >>> omit them. >> >> That was my point. Many "foreign" (being US-centric in my comments, >> here) languages use *lots* of diacritical marks. > > What an American calls a foreign language is to me very ambiguous, > considering the use of Spanish now and in the past, the use of German > before WW1 and also the real indigenous languages! I think that's why USEnglish is so wonky. Too much "stolen" from other languages and then bastardized over the years. (though I heard a recent commentary alleging USEnglish is truer to "old" UKEnglish than current UKEnglish is, today). Couple that with regional differences (unavoidable with a land mass of this size) and its a wonder *anyone* can understand it! >> I particularly >> love the upside down interrogatives used at the start of questions! > > I actually use them when making notes to myself. Makes it easier to > decipher. But you can usually phrase a question so one of the "W-words" introduces it (at least for notes). >> [...] >>> Of course, there is the other point that languages change over time. >>> While many people would agree that "na�ve" should be spelt "na�ve", >>> very few people would write co�perate - it has gone out of fashion >>> long ago. >> >> Sure. Soon, OMG will have a formal dictionary entry, people will >> spell "God" (proper) with a lowercase G, etc. > > Not being a monotheist, I find it offensive to think that some god would > somehow deserve a capital letter while others do not. I do recognize There is no claim that it is any *particular* god. Most dictionaries qualify the "G" definition to be "In monotheistic religions..." so they cover their bases. I guess the real zinger is the existence of the word itself (regardless of case) in the eyes of atheists :> (but, then again, how would you describe what you *don't* believe in if you couldn't put a name on it?) > that not all gods were created equal, but that doesn't mean that anyone > has the right to define in language that some god (or some group of > allegedly exclusive gods) comes before others. |