You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
The character mappings mostly represent Unicode and hexadecimal characters with escape sequences rather than the characters themselves. (E.g., æ is represented by \xe6 and ʌ is represented by \u028c)
But there are non-escaped, non-ASCII IPA characters in the mappings under // edits arising from testing. The same is true for all the instances of /mʊmˈbaɪ/ in the HTML.
Are escape sequences helpful here? If so, should these unescaped characters be converted?
If not, could all the characters be unescaped? Testing locally, it seems to work fine that way. And it would make the code more readable.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered:
The escape sequences came from Lexconvert, and the reason why I wrote them as escape sequences is I was using an editor on an ASCII-only terminal at the time. I see no reason not to convert them all to UTF-8 if we can guarantee that UTF-8 will be used as the character set for the script.
The character mappings mostly represent Unicode and hexadecimal characters with escape sequences rather than the characters themselves. (E.g.,
æ
is represented by\xe6
andʌ
is represented by\u028c
)But there are non-escaped, non-ASCII IPA characters in the mappings under
// edits arising from testing
. The same is true for all the instances of/mʊmˈbaɪ/
in the HTML.Are escape sequences helpful here? If so, should these unescaped characters be converted?
If not, could all the characters be unescaped? Testing locally, it seems to work fine that way. And it would make the code more readable.
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: