From fe31cc20beb9aa73105b8ac40e3e6b41db0af035 Mon Sep 17 00:00:00 2001 From: Klaus Rettinghaus Date: Tue, 11 Feb 2025 17:03:36 +0100 Subject: [PATCH] remove bold emphasis (#2678) * remove bold emphasis * remove unneeded rend attributes * use term instead of glyph --- .../Guidelines/en/CH-LanguagesCharacterSets.xml | 14 +++++++------- 1 file changed, 7 insertions(+), 7 deletions(-) diff --git a/P5/Source/Guidelines/en/CH-LanguagesCharacterSets.xml b/P5/Source/Guidelines/en/CH-LanguagesCharacterSets.xml index 78df2218dd..ba4acd8b2c 100644 --- a/P5/Source/Guidelines/en/CH-LanguagesCharacterSets.xml +++ b/P5/Source/Guidelines/en/CH-LanguagesCharacterSets.xml @@ -77,7 +77,7 @@ processes, the identifier for the language must be constructed as in BCP 47 comprises two Internet Engineering Task Force documents, referred to separately as RFC 5646 and RFC 4647; over time, other IETF documents may succeed these as the best current practice.. This -same identifier has to be used to identify +same identifier has to be used to identify the corresponding language element in the TEI header, if one is present.

The first part of BCP 47 is called Tags for Identifying @@ -227,9 +227,9 @@ dates, and predefined value lists.</note></p></div> storey</soCalled> version (as in <ref target="#fig1">figure 1</ref> in the examples from Umpush, or URW Bookman L Demi Bold). We say that the single and double-storey symbols both represent - one and the same the same <emph rend="bold">abstract - character</emph> <mentioned>a</mentioned> using two different - <emph rend="bold">glyphs</emph>. Similarly, an uppercase + one and the same the same <term>abstract + character</term> <mentioned>a</mentioned> using two different + <term>glyphs</term>. Similarly, an uppercase <mentioned>A</mentioned> in a serif typeface has additional strokes that are absent from the same letter when printed using a sans-serif typeface, so that once again we have differing glyphs @@ -649,12 +649,12 @@ dates, and predefined value lists.</note></p></div> encodings, and the way characters which under ISO-8859-n use all eight bits are encoded in UTF-8 is significantly different, giving rise to puzzling errors. Abstract characters that have a - <emph rend="italic">single</emph> byte code point where the + <emph>single</emph> byte code point where the highest bit is set (that is, they have a decimal numeric representation between 129 and 255) are encoded in ISO-8859-n - as a <emph rend="italic">single</emph> byte with the same value + as a <emph>single</emph> byte with the same value as the code point. But in UTF-8 code-point values inside that - range are expressed as a <emph rend="italic">two</emph> byte + range are expressed as a <emph>two</emph> byte sequence. That is to say, the abstract character in question is no longer represented in the file or in memory by the same number as its code-point value: it is <hi>transformed</hi> (hence the T in