Ar 07:54 -0700 1999-07-04, scríobh Mark Davis:
>It sounds like you are suggesting that whenever a letter could collate
>differently, it should be cloned.
No, Mark, I'm not. That is one of the criteria. Another is the simple truth
that ordinary words in European scripts are not normally written in more
than one script. The disease of overunification is best exemplified by the
rejection of KU and WE, but I believe that users of the IPA would be better
served if three of these clones were added to the UCS.
>That would end up with a muddle of visually identical characters,
>especially for Latin. There would be at least three copies of a-diaeresis,
>for example.
There is a Cyrillic a-diaeresis and a Latin a-diaeresis. This is perfectly
correct. Don't give me the visually identical argument, it's what resulted
in the overunifications (by sight, not by meaning). A = A = Alpha, we all
know that. So Q = Q.
>If you really had a mixture of IPA, Greek, and Latin, and wanted words sorted
>three different ways, then you should tag them appropriately; just as if you
>wanted Swedish and German words to sort differently.
As if people like the Kurds didn't have enough problems. Tell me how to
sort a list of Kurdish words, some of which are written in Kurdish Latin
orthography, and some of which are written in Kurdish Cyrillic orthography,
without unreasonable expense.
You should know by now, Mark, that I'm not all for encoding just anything.
I just think that there are some unifications made that were errors.
-- Michael Everson * Everson Gunn Teoranta * http://www.indigo.ie/egt 15 Port Chaeimhghein Íochtarach; Baile Átha Cliath 2; Éire/Ireland Guthán: +353 1 478 2597 ** Facsa: +353 1 478 2597 (by arrangement) 27 Páirc an Fhéithlinn; Baile an Bhóthair; Co. Átha Cliath; Éire
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:48 EDT