At 13:18 -0700 7/8/1999, John Cowan wrote:

>Edward Cherlin wrote:

<<retroactive sarcasm marker>

>> No, after 11,172 Johab

>> glyphs were promoted to characters, what's one or two, or three, or
...

<</retroactive sarcasm marker>


>That was done for compatibility with a character set, and it was

>done in an algorithmic way.  

>Show me a character set (not a font) with DOTLESS J.


Um, John? We're on the same side here. I say it's a glyph usable only
in rendering characters, and is not a character itself.


>Also, it is conceded that the Korean mess was a *mess*, and

>Temperance Pledges have been taken by all concerned.


I had supposed that the principle of round-trip compatibility with
existing character set standards was to apply only to standards in
existence before Unicode 1.0. If there is agreement now that Unicode
will not allow itself to be shanghaied by national standards bodies
again, I applaud.


>> How many would there be for IPA? Any estimates? How many

>> distinguishable speech sounds are there in 6700 languages?

>

>IPA is productive and Johab is not.


Korean jamo<fontfamily><param>Seoul</param><smaller>
¿Ž½•</smaller></fontfamily> are productive, but how is productiveness
relevant? 


>-- 

>	John Cowan	http://www.ccil.org/~cowan	cowan@ccil.org

>Schlingt dreifach einen Kreis um dies! / Schliesst euer Aug vor
heiliger Schau,

>Denn er genoss vom Honig-Tau / Und trank die Milch vom Paradies.

>			-- Coleridge / Politzer 



--

Edward Cherlin   edward.cherlin.sy.67@aya.yale.edu

"It isn't what you don't know that hurts you, it's 

what you know that ain't so."--Mark Twain, or else

some other prominent 19th century humorist and wit