Subject:
|
™ ™ and [tm] woes
|
Newsgroups:
|
lugnet.publish
|
Date:
|
Wed, 12 Jan 2000 02:02:10 GMT
|
Viewed:
|
856 times
|
| |
|
|
In lugnet.publish, Jacob Sparre Andersen writes:
> Todd Lehman (lehman@javanet.com) wrote:
> > Since you know so much about this, can I ask another follow-up question?--
> > Is ™ "safer" (i.e., more likely to show up as the TM symbol) to use
> > than ™ ?
>
> I would expect ™ to be just as likely to work as ™ today. I
> expect ™ to be phased out sometime, but I don't know when (it might
> happen with NC5.0).
>
> > How big is that in relation to the regular capital letters T and M in that
> > typeface? And is it raised above the baseline?
>
> You can see the rendering of
>
> <P>
> T M ™ --- ™ T M<BR>
> <P>
> [tm]=™
>
> at <URL:http://hugin.risoe.dk/temp/trademark_symbol>. It looks like NC
> substitutes the trademark symbol with [tm], if it can't find it in the
> current font.
Oh, man, I see what you mean now. I can't believe how braindead Netscape
4.61 for RHLinux/Gnome is under the default install. Not having the actual
tm symbol is one thing, but it actually converts it to a 4-byte character
string!! :-( BLYECH!
In other words, you output
<INPUT TYPE=TEXT NAME="foo" VALUE="Millennium Falcon™">
and what _actually_goes_into_ the edit box is
Millennium Falcon[tm]
just like that! EGAD! HELP! It's evil!
It should instead be putting in some full-8-bit-binary character which just
happens to display as [tm], but not putting in ASCII '[', followed by 't',
followed by 'm', followed by ']'.
Any ideas what can I do to fix this so that Nutscrape under RHL/Gnome doesn't
ruin edit fields like that?
--Todd
|
|
Message is in Reply To:
16 Messages in This Thread:
 
 
 
- Entire Thread on One Page:
- Nested:
All | Brief | Compact | Dots
Linear:
All | Brief | Compact
|
|
|
|
