AdamStanislav

I’m glad you find them useful.

I wish the forum had a TLDR button.

I imagine linking to a whole bunch of fonts is supposed to tell me something in your mind, but I am not a mind reader, only a retired psychologist, and have no idea what you are trying to say. Sorry.

This thread is devolving into a Pascal wager......

Oh for nerding out loud! Why not go even more prediluvial and produce Affinity Fortran? 👴 If you are really stuck on the ancient language designed for teaching rather than actual programming, use GNU Pascal.

What kind of fund?

You select them and click the Add button (+). But for what you are trying to do, you should duplicate them first and then only merge the duplicate. The simplest way to do it would be to select everything (^a), make it all a group (^g), duplicate the group, select everything in the duplicate and add it.

No, sorry. None of the ways that or any other word is pronounced in English sounds anything like the Slovak Ľ. That sound simply does not exist in English. Just as the two English th sounds do not exist in Slovak (and many other languages). Not every sound exists in every language.

Definitely not million, but Ljubljana yes. In Slovenian they spell it lj, in Italian they spell it gl, in Spanish (as far as I can tell) ll, in Russian and Ukrainian лЬ, in Slovak ľ. It is a soft sounding l (el) with the middle of the tongue touching the upper palate, and the tip of the tongue touching the lower teeth from behind. And the video William linked to gets it right. Though it gets lev wrong, as when an l is followed by an e or an i, it is pronounced as ľ in Slovak.

Interesting how? I would think Ľ would be more interesting than č or š. Of course, the worst thing you may do is to type L’ instead of Ľ, or to confuse Ľ with Ĺ. Completely different sounds. The most interesting thing about Ľ is to hear a native English speaker trying to pronounce it (I have met only one who could). 🤣

Oh and before anyone asks, https://www.ckrumlov.info/en/sights-and-culture-101-revolving-theatre-cesky-krumlov/ is my favorite theatre in the world.

Wow, it’s like visiting an old friend. Definitely my second favorite theatre in the world.

I imagine Semafor would never be convinced to use that Thank you for visiting code. I have no idea whether Semafor still exists but it was a famous theatre in Prague back in the ’60s and ’70s. I was privileged to see a performance in my younger years, and I loved the welcome sign, the first thing you’d see upon entering. A rough English translation would be, Welcome ye who with a good intention leave. Yes, some of their things may have been seen as controversial, so they welcomed you if you still liked them after their performance. Such a sign would have been impossible with a sentence code (which would violate their copyright anyway), but it could have been made with word codes, such as Egyptian hieroglyphics or those Chinese glyphs that puzzle you so much, William.

OK, I have found a solution, though it involves extra steps. First, I had to give the image a white background in Affinity Designer. Then I had to export it as SVG. Then I had to import the SVG to Inkscape (something I hate to do). Then I could export it to PNG at 40x40 pixels as a 2-color image. Then the rest as before (PNG to PBM, PBM to SVG). This is the result, and this,

On second thought, it is probably how Irfan View converts the PNG to PBM. I examined the PNG and it has more shades than black and white. But PBM is strictly a two-value format. I wonder if there is a way to tell AD to only use black and white when exporting to PNG, as it would probably do a better job converting from the vector than Irfan View converting from PNG.

I can only assume that is Affinity’s way to emulate a line of a subpixel width. Typically, there would be a straight line of some shade of gray, but when exporting to just black and white pixels, using a “dotted line” will produce the illusion of a gray line. That is, when the image remains small. But when it is made larger, suddenly we can see the trick for what it is. This really is how images and fonts used to be printed by dot-matrix printers some forty years ago. After all they could either print a black dot or nothing. And the dots were very small, so we either did not notice or were just happy we had a way of printing images (that was why Adobe eventually developed hinting for their Type 1 fonts). Kind of like we tolerated the sound of early record players and AM radio because they were all we could get.

I have been playing with converting black & white images into dots. It is a seemingly complex process but I have managed to automate the hardest step. I start by creating a simple B&W image in Affinity Designer. For example, I then export it to PNG at a small resolution, such as 40x40 pixels. I actually need an ASCII .pbm image, but Designer does not export to those, so I get a PNG instead. Like this, (the forum seems scaling it up unfortunately, in reality this is much smaller). The .pbm image format allows only one of two values for every pixel, 0 if it is a background pixel (so white in our example) and 1 if it is an image pixel (so black in this example). And since it is an easy-to-parse text format, I wrote a simple C program that creates an SVG file with a circle (dot) for every 1, like this, or for every 0 instead, like this, And because the result is plain SVG, I can edit several of them together, distort them, change the colors, etc. Like this, I will probably post the C source code of my program converting .pbm to SVG. It, of course, would be nice if Affinity Designer could do it on its own, but it is still fun doing it this way.

That is why. You can create many more sentences if you encode words/concepts than entire sentences. There is a reason why all human languages construct sentences from words. They may use different grammar and syntax, but they all construct complex ideas (sentences) from simple concepts (words).

Does it? Is that something you have decided or is it some standard that I have never heard of? I seem to have seen it signal the numbers are hexadecimal digits in some computer usage. I don’t recall ever hearing/seeing/reading it to signal a localizable sentence code. Of course, I may be too young as I have only started computing in 1965... Seriously, I find the idea of having a code for every conceivable sentence a bit recondite. Chinese has 2400 most common glyphs to describe words, and it took 4000 years to evolve. A sequence of such glyphs forms a sentence that speakers of multiple languages can and do understand, both in China and other countries. Those glyphs have evolved from actual drawings of the things they represent. Yet, the odds of them being accepted for all languages are rather nugatory. So how many unique fishing hooks are you planning to come up with for every sentence?

QR codes encode essentially raw data. Language preference has nothing to with it. See https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/QR_code for more (albeit confusing) information.

I checked again, and this time it does say !983. Either way, I have no idea what it means. Just an exclamation point followed by three decimal digits. Something the Cold War spies would use, I guess.

That’s what I did. And I am completely puzzled by these questions: Doesn’t everyone in 2022 have a cell phone (mobile phone)? Both Android and Apple phones come with at least one camera, and an app that can both, take pictures and decode QR codes.

!193

It’s been a while since I posted a LUT, so here is Rusty.cube and yes, I already had a Rust.cube, but this is different:

Looks like you already are good.