471,089 Members | 1,802 Online
Bytes | Software Development & Data Engineering Community
Post +

Home Posts Topics Members FAQ

Join Bytes to post your question to a community of 471,089 software developers and data experts.

Time to ™ up

Witty subject aside, I have an issue... shouldn't ™ or it's numerical
equivilent ™ be language independent? Such that if the language of the
document is set to "fr" it would be the MC instead of the TM? Or is there a
french equivilent that I'm not familiar with?

Jonathan
Jul 20 '05 #1
5 8902
"Jonathan Snook" <go****************@snook.ca> wrote:
Witty subject aside, I have an issue... shouldn't &trade; or it's numerical
equivilent ™ be language independent?
Not only should it - it is. Certain paired characters such as ( ) [ ]
are DIR dependent, but none is LANG dependent.
Such that if the language of the
document is set to "fr" it would be the MC instead of the TM?


Non.
Jul 20 '05 #2
"Jonathan Snook" <go****************@snook.ca> wrote:
shouldn't &trade; or it's numerical
equivilent ™ be language independent?
It is by definition language independent, but not in the sense you
mean.
Such that if the
language of the document is set to "fr" it would be the MC instead
of the TM?


No, it is language independent in the sense that the character is the
same independently of the language context, just as the copyright sign,
registered sign, and at sign are. It can be _pronounced_ differently,
though.

The Unicode standard defines the trade mark sign as a compatibility
character, which is compatibility equivalent to TM in superscript
style, i.e. <sup>TM</sup> to use HTML notation. This does not imply,
however, that the rendering of ⁚ must be the same as that of
<sup>TM</sup> - variation in style is possible.

--
Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
Pages about Web authoring: http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/www.html

Jul 20 '05 #3
"Jukka K. Korpela" <jk******@cs.tut.fi> wrote in message
news:Xn*****************************@193.229.0.31. ..
No, it is language independent in the sense that the character is the
same independently of the language context, just as the copyright sign,
registered sign, and at sign are. It can be _pronounced_ differently,
though.


The problem with the TM sign is that in french it's not a TM, it's an MC. My
assumption would be that each language would or could have it's own
trademark symbol. Of course it'd be pronounced differently, it'd be a
different word in each language. The copyright sign, registered sign, and at
sign, in my mind, are different in that the characters are (presumably)
universal.

So, when I work on a French page and I need to put a French "droit d'auteur"
(copyright), I can do &copy;. But when I want to do a trademark, I have to
use <sup>MC</sup> and cannot use &trade;.

I know there's really no way around it. Just talking semantics. :)

Jonathan
--
http://www.snook.ca/

Jul 20 '05 #4
"Jonathan Snook" <go***************@snook.ca> wrote:
My assumption would be that each language would or could
have it's own trade mark symbol.
The idea behind the trademark symbol is that it is universal.
The
copyright sign, registered sign, and at sign, in my mind, are
different in that the characters are (presumably) universal.
Not really any more universal than the trade mark symbol. It all
depends on what characters people use.
So, when I work on a French page and I need to put a French "droit
d'auteur" (copyright), I can do &copy;. But when I want to do a
trademark, I have to use <sup>MC</sup> and cannot use &trade;.


Well, maybe, if MC is the practice in French. Of course you cannot use
&trade; unless you mean the TM character.

In theory, entities (such as &trade;) were introduced into SGML to
allow macro-like notations that will be replaced by different strings
in different circumstances. But HTML took a simplistic view on this and
only uses entities that expand to fixed character references.

--
Yucca, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
Pages about Web authoring: http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/www.html

Jul 20 '05 #5
On Wed, 8 Oct 2003, Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
The idea behind the trademark symbol is that it is universal.


The "registered trademark sign" should be universal.
But I doubt whether the "trademark sign" TM has any legal meaning
outside North America.

Jul 20 '05 #6

This discussion thread is closed

Replies have been disabled for this discussion.

Similar topics

80 posts views Thread by Bibby | last post: by
1 post views Thread by Cognizance | last post: by
3 posts views Thread by Trammel | last post: by
9 posts views Thread by Leslie Coover | last post: by

By using Bytes.com and it's services, you agree to our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.

To disable or enable advertisements and analytics tracking please visit the manage ads & tracking page.