Talk:Code2000/Archive 1

Vanity

Sounds like a vanity page, but we could always use more typefaces. --Ardonik 23:11, Jul 16, 2004 (UTC)

It's an ad!

If properly constructed in a neutral way, this page would begin by describing the Code2000 character set, including its historical basis and its relationship to Unicode. It would then list all possible sources of Code2000 fonts, including the Kass font, and it would provide links to all these sources.

It should not mention that the Kass font is a shareware product unless it does so uniformly for all the other fonts it mentions.

--BlairRMartin 15:15, 2005 Mar 20 (UTC)

The fonts mentioned here are notable in that they cover Unicode so widely, while they were created by a single individual. In order for the article to become more encyclopedic, I think someone should contact James Kass and get some more information on the fonts' creation (when it began, which tools were used, etc). Also, I think the examples of the font in the article should be replaced by images, so that the article becomes more self-contained. Adia 20:09, 2005 May 30 (UTC)

Help

Greetings. This article mentions the Free Software Foundation fonts, but what are those? My curiosty led me to look through all of the FSF site and I found nothing regarding those. Do they exist? If yes, shouldn't an article be written about them? As in, another user aside me might want information in that matter. --Saoshyant 00:56, 25 September 2005 (UTC)[reply]

I downloaded Code2002 so I can properly see this page. Problem is, where do I unzip it to? I have Windows XP Home Edition with Service Pack 2. Oopsie. Forgot my sig. --Admiral Roo 17:34, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

Unzip to your desktop, then install through fonts' file menu. If you unzip directly in fonts your OS may not be smart enough to recognize it without a restart.

Just installing it is not enough, you also need to patch your registry: download and run this file. It is setup to configure Uniscribe, and set Code2001 and Code2002 for planes 1 and 2. Jordi·✆ 17:38, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Windows Registry Editor Version 5.00

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\LanguagePack]
"SURROGATE"=dword:00000002

[HKEY_LOCAL_MACHINE\SOFTWARE\Microsoft\Windows NT\CurrentVersion\LanguagePack\SurrogateFallback]
"Plane1"="Code2001"
"Plane2"="Code2002"
"Plane15"="Code2001"

[HKEY_CURRENT_USER\Software\Microsoft\Internet Explorer\International\Scripts\42]
"IEPropFontName"="Code2001"

Or just copy the above in a text file, save as foo.reg, and execute. Jordi·✆ 17:40, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

By the way, I just noticed you mention you got Code2002: you should also get Code2001, as the page you refer to contains Plane One characters. Any Unicode character between U+1000 and U+1FFF is in Plane One, Plane Two contains characters U+2000 to U+2FFF. Jordi·✆ 17:43, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

That was quick. I did not think ppl would read this talk page vary often so I posted a near duplacate in this talk page. Thank you for your quick response. --Admiral Roo 17:49, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

Ok, I did what both you and Denelson83 told me to do. However I have no idea what to save the text document as to get it to exicute. These are my choices, RTF (Rich Text Format), Text Document, Text Document MS Dos Format, or Unicode Text Document. I tried saveing as UTD, but the thing told me "You are about to save the document in a Text-Only format, which will remove all formatting. Do you wish to continue?" --Admiral Roo 18:05, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

Never mind, I found I was using Wordpad instead of Notepad. It worked. --Admiral Roo 18:07, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

Incorrect, Jordi. Plane One characters are U+10000 through U+1FFFF, and Plane Two characters are U+20000 through U+2FFFF. Denelson 83 18:13, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

So I dropped a character. Sue me, it's only the Wikipedia. Jordi·✆ 18:15, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

(Scratches head) Maybe I should merge these two talk pages into on of the talk pages and put a redirect link on the other talk page so WE don't have to scan both talk pages for updates. Opinions? --Admiral Roo 18:17, August 5, 2005 (UTC) This is what I did step by step.

Opened up the Font folder using the Run command and copied both the Code2001 and Code2002 TTF's from the download folder to the Font folder.
Opend up Wordpad and copied and pasted the code Jordi gave me, and found it did not work.
Opend Notepade and copied and pasted the code in. Saved it as Jordi told me to and the file became an exicutible. I exicuted it.
Quite Internet Exploerer and reopend it, and went to the Mathematical alphanumeric symbols, and to my horror, I still see boxes.

--Admiral Roo 18:22, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

see below. Jordi·✆ 18:28, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Merged all content from Talk:Unicode#Having_some_trouble to here.

I just downloaded Code2002 to see this page correctly. Normally, I am vary good at knowing where to put files in my computers. However, this is the first time I downloaded a True Type Font, and I don't know where to put it. I have Windows XP Home Editoion with Service Pack 2. I have a special folder on my desktop that I download to whenever I download free EXE files or ZIP files, and when I unzipped Code2002, it only came with the TTF file, but no instructions on where to put it. Thanks for your time in reading this. --Admiral Roo 17:42, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

Go to the Start menu, choose the "Run" command, type in "Fonts", and then click "OK". The folder where you're supposed to put the font you downloaded will then open. Denelson 83 17:47, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

Wow, another fast response. I put in a duplacate message here, but I did not think anyone would see that before they saw this page. Thank you too. --Admiral Roo 17:52, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

I did what you Denelson83 and Anarion told me to do, but it still did not work. :( --Admiral Roo 18:10, August 5, 2005 (UTC)

Log off, then log on again. XP won't reload Uniscribe settings during a session, and MSIE also needs a reload before it figures out it has a new font. Looks like you did everything right. Jordi·✆ 18:28, 5 August 2005 (UTC)[reply]

(Scratches head again) Logged off, then logged back on (actually I turned power off then back on again, Mom and I share the same account). Unfortunatly, Pandoras box is still closed. :(

Weird. Can you try downloading (save as) and then directly executing my file linked above? [1]. It's what I use on PCs whenever I need to enable the substitution, and hasn't failed me yet. It's always possible Wordpad screwed something up with the registry file (would not be the first time!).

Tried that before I put in the code in Wordpad, but I dared not download it because it gave me two options, save as a Winamp file, or all files. --Admiral Roo 18:43, August 5, 2005 (UTC) BTW, I forgot to tell you what kind of Winamp file it tries saving as, it is an MP3

Many of the characters are misplaced or have an incorrect glyph (For example, “持” is displayed as “扗”)

Look, I know the question marks are the result of my browser/font combination not rendering Unicode properly, but arguably the second question mark ought to be a picture, not a character. You want to display a glyph, after all. It's silly to expect me to have Code2000 installed just so I can read the criticism in its article properly. 81.58.51.131 08:16, 29 March 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Critics

I removed this from the article:

The font has a very wide coverage of character sets. However, the glyphs for Unihan are badly shaped:

Half of the characters are missing
Many of the characters are misplaced or have an incorrect glyph (For example, “持” is displayed as “扗”)
Many local varieties of characters are all given the Japanese glyph.

On the other hand, the support for the Mongolian alphabet of this font is the best among publicly available fonts.

because it seems to be based on an old version of the font. The particular example for an incorrect glyph is now correctly displayed, and as far as I can tell half of the characters aren't missing.

Besides, it looks like it was original research to begin with. --Ptcamn 14:44, 7 April 2006 (UTC)[reply]

Place to download Code2000

Does anyone know where I can still download Code2000? It seems because he wanted to be paid, the author put the file on very few websites, and his is down (old and on the new site the downloading doesn't work). The last version is 1.16. 81.57.43.204 11:05, 10 September 2006 (UTC)[reply]

"Sample"

Sample (you must have Code2000 installed in order to view it properly):

Lorem ipsum dolor sit amet, consectetur adipiscing elit, sed do eiusmod tempor incididunt ut labore et dolore magna aliqua. Ut enim ad minim veniam, quis nostrud exercitation ullamco laboris nisi ut aliquip ex ea commodo consequat. Duis aute irure dolor in reprehenderit in voluptate velit esse cillum dolore eu fugiat nulla pariatur. Excepteur sint occaecat cupidatat non proident, sunt in culpa qui officia deserunt mollit anim id est laborum.

And how many people have Code2000 installed ? 0.1% ? A picture is the only reasonable way. Taw 04:08, 20 October 2006 (UTC)[reply]

notability

it's possible that the article needs more criticism, but the notability of the font is not in question. It's our first choice for {{unicode}} on MediaWiki:Common.css, which in itself establishes notability (Wikipedia is among the top-ten or so websites now). The font is your first choice if you don't care about free licenses, and if you don't want to pay through your nose. dab (𒁳) 06:11, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I don't think that does establish notability. The question is, is there enough information in reliable sources for us to write an article about it with references? Is it even possible to expand this article? And I think the answer is no. --Ptcamn 07:09, 16 April 2007 (UTC)[reply]

There might be a review or two of it in a trade magazine for typographers. A journal devoted to writing systems might also contain a review of it. Most mentions of this font are of the kind: "Install Code2000 to correctly display the text of this document." This is simply because Code2000 is one of the few pan-Unicode fonts that covers the entire Unicode spectrum. Unicode typefaces has a nice chart that shows just how much more of the Unicode spectrum Code2000 covers than other fonts. Other fonts with the same depth of Unicode coverage are significantly more expensive. jonathon 22:05, 14 May 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Redirect

Surprised that I couldn't find an existing article on this font and Code2000 redirected to Unicode typefaces. --A12n 16:56, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Previous versions of this article have been deleted on the grounds that this is not a notable font.jonathon 18:41, 19 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Thanks for the info. I missed that, but for what it's worth, Code2000 has been among those fonts mentioned in some circles for handling diverse character needs. The need for such a font may be decreasing as existing Unicode-encoded fonts are expanded and new ones created, but it still seems noteworthy. --A12n 03:42, 20 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

deletion has been overturned -- Wikipedia:Deletion_review/Log/2007_July_16.

A second nomination for deletion resulted in a speedy keep; all comments apart from the original nomination were to keep. See Wikipedia:Articles for deletion/Code2000 (second nomination). —Duae Quartunciae (talk · cont) 02:24, 20 August 2007 (UTC)[reply]

I tried this font, but the upper-case Y appears instead of a lower-case open-tail g [ɡ]. Wikipedia:International_Phonetic_Alphabet#Voiced velar plosive --Mahmudmasri (talk) 20:15, 26 February 2009 (UTC)[reply]

This appears only in old versions. 212.95.48.104 (talk) 14:00, 30 April 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The http://www.code2000.net is down

James Kass has some unexplained break:

http://www.unicode.org/mail-arch/unicode-ml/y2010-m10/0022.html

because his font development is suddenly halted. 83.7.242.254 (talk) 15:12, 1 November 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Erm, James Kass' website is down (http://www.downforeveryoneorjustme.com/code2000.net) and yet it is not expired (http://reports.internic.net/cgi/whois?whois_nic=code2000.net&type=domain). Should we wait till August to report the complete death of this project? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Espadrine (talk • contribs) 09:54, 21 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Where is the official website now? — Preceding unsigned comment added by Aaditya 7 (talk • contribs) 04:24, 26 March 2011 (UTC)[reply]

It is listed NOW at article's bottom, where you can download final version, stripped from beta additions. 80.232.240.49 (talk) 10:04, 2 May 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Is the sourceforge site really official? I can't see any announcement on the web that the code2000 has been released under the GPL so this looks suspiciously like someone ripping off the font.

213.106.114.78 (talk) 22:09, 1 June 2011 (UTC)[reply]

As of 1 September, http://www.code2000.net is now up, but it is NOT site of James Kass! Instead it is spamlist full of advertising. So we now finally stick with sourceforge.85.17.190.71 (talk) 16:57, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

The Source Forge site looks dubious to me. Although the project creator's real name is given as James Kass, how certain can we be that he really is James Kass? I used to have a lot of email contact with James, but have been unable to contact him for over a year now, and fear the worse. I very much doubt that he has closed down his web site and moved Code2000 to SF without telling anyone. The version of the font avilable at the SF site is 1.171, exactly the same as the last version available from his original web site (dating from 2008), and still incorporating the shareware license ("Code2000 is shareware. Users are required to register the font after a reasonable evaluation period by sending $5.00 (US) or equivalent to: James Kass"). I suspect that the SF project was set up by someone impersonating James Kass in order to host a version of Code2000 originally downloaded from http://www.code2000.net. BabelStone (talk) 22:23, 1 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

There could be opposite, so nothing would be dubious here. Even if James Kass is dead and in grave, his heirs simply could save his work from disappearance. They could do this move from shareware to GPL. So only impersonators involved would be his heirs. JOHNDOE (talk) 13:04, 2 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Note: postings by socks of banned user struck. If the Sourceforge site is indeed a fake, it may well be the case that the sockpuppeter who promoted it here is responsible for creating it too. Fut.Perf. ☼ 20:45, 9 September 2011 (UTC)[reply]

I analyzed code2000.asm and it was illegally dumped by TTF Dump from http://www.microsoft.com/typography/tools/tools.aspx 173.254.215.226 (talk) 20:41, 25 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Meanwhile even there is another supposedly free GNU GPL SourceForge download option, still the download page on SourceForge is apparently a blatant fake and it's a copyright infringement and software piracy. The real author is apparently not available for months, and his website is currently no longer in operation. The SourceForge page is a case of "impostor" action. The three files that are downloadable from there are still the same as before, and internally they still bear non-free shareware "$ 5 cost" markings, also the dBase III *.DBF source code (as would be expected from SourceForge) does not exist. 174.120.234.2 (talk) 08:43, 26 December 2011 (UTC)[reply]

Shutdown reasons: http://www.mail-archive.com/unicode@unicode.org/msg29951.html