For the record, G. Adam Stanislav wrote:
> when I suggested to treat 'CH' as a character [...]
> I was swamped with the reasons why that should not be the case,
> but at the same time it is apparently OK to encode fictional
> "alphabets" such as Klingon in Unicode.
That's not the way it is. The UTC has not approved Klingon, nor endorsed
it, not discussed Everson's proposal officially in meetings. A number of
representatives, such as myself, are strongly opposed to the willy-nilly
encoding of "pop culture" scripts such as Klingon. It is VASTLY more
important to encode a number of real minority scripts of the world.
(Advertisement: Read all about it in Tina Lieu's article on Unicode 3.0 in
this month's "Multilingual Computing".)
> I guess linguistic reasons are secondary to popularity reasons.
Again, no. The treatment of C+H in the Latin script is a completely
different topic than the encoding of entire scripts, so please understand
Technical Director, Unicode, Inc,
and Alternate UTC Rep for Apple Computer, Inc.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:54 EDT