At 12:43 PM 12/27/99 -0800, Marco.Cimarosti@icl.com wrote:
> Who said that the primary
>thing I want to do with my text is to display or print it, rather than,
>say,
>store it in a database for doing a statistical research?
This to me seems to be the key issue. AAT/OT seems to have *a* handle on
selecting the ligature glyphs (maybe not the best handle, but I'm not
competent to judge). But to the extent that ligatures hold semantic value
that cannot be conveyed in any other way, they deserve to be searchable by
methods that don't rely on markup (which AFAIK are just about all the
methods in use. Perhaps there is no need to separate Wachs/tube and
Wach/stube, but if someone wanted to search and sort bind-runes (I'm
assuming that's what Michael is talking about--I haven't read the original
paper), it seems to me the current system doesn't give that capability.
----------------------------------------------------------------
Curtis Clark http://www.csupomona.edu/~jcclark/
Biological Sciences Department Voice: (909) 869-4062
California State Polytechnic University FAX: (909) 869-4078
Pomona CA 91768-4032 USA jcclark@csupomona.edu
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:57 EDT