Re: Displaying 'umlaut' character
From: (wrong string) ürgen Exner <jurgenex_at_hotmail.com>
Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2010 06:25:47 -0700
Message-ID: <o7lm969h3rm02pceglu817v45ppjnrj8kt_at_4ax.com>
"Dr.Ruud" <rvtol+usenet_at_xs4all.nl> wrote:
>On 2010-09-23 03:13, Jürgen Exner wrote:
>> Frank van Bortel<fbortel_at_home.nl> wrote:
>
>>> Apart from what I replied earlier, the correct way to encode
>>> is of course "ö" (without the quotes...)
>>
>> If that were true then I guess we wouldn't need Unicode and all the
>> gazillion other attempts to represent non-English letters.
>
>Non-English? The trema (diaeresis) is often used: cooperate reenact
>zoology Brontë naïve. (Umlaut diacritics are not.)
Date: Thu, 23 Sep 2010 06:25:47 -0700
Message-ID: <o7lm969h3rm02pceglu817v45ppjnrj8kt_at_4ax.com>
"Dr.Ruud" <rvtol+usenet_at_xs4all.nl> wrote:
>On 2010-09-23 03:13, Jürgen Exner wrote:
>> Frank van Bortel<fbortel_at_home.nl> wrote:
>
>>> Apart from what I replied earlier, the correct way to encode
>>> is of course "ö" (without the quotes...)
>>
>> If that were true then I guess we wouldn't need Unicode and all the
>> gazillion other attempts to represent non-English letters.
>
>Non-English? The trema (diaeresis) is often used: cooperate reenact
>zoology Brontë naïve. (Umlaut diacritics are not.)
Quite right. Nevertheless it's still not a character found in the English alphabet.
jue Received on Thu Sep 23 2010 - 08:25:47 CDT