Re: Kana and Case (was [totally OT] Unicode terminology)

From: Michael Everson (
Date: Thu Nov 23 2000 - 05:34:02 EST

Ar 16:09 -0800 2000-11-22, scríobh Thomas Chan:

>I think a bit, yes. Those characters for names of horses (or individuals)
>aren't fictional like the Klingon alphabet. There already are some in
>the BMP for names of horses, such as U+9A04, U+9A4A, U+9A2E; or
>individuals such as U+66CC, btw--but probably included on the basis of
>being in legacy character sets as of the early 90's.

What has fictionality have to do with it? The criteria for encoding rest
primarily in the area of information interchange. Now it seems perhaps not
very likely that most users of Klingon (which is a language people learn
and use whether anyone else likes it or not; it's no worse than Volapük or
Esperanto just because it's invented) actually employ the Klingon script.
But Tengwar and Cirth are "fictional" scripts which are used and studied by
linguists and enthusiasts, and there are manuscripts containing text
written in these that people want to digitize and so on....

Arguably, more has been written in and about Tengwar and Cirth than has
been written about the "non-fictional" Elbasan or Nsibidi scripts.

Michael Everson ** Everson Gunn Teoranta **
15 Port Chaeimhghein Íochtarach; Baile Átha Cliath 2; Éire/Ireland
Vox +353 1 478 2597 ** Fax +353 1 478 2597 ** Mob +353 86 807 9169
27 Páirc an Fhéithlinn; Baile an Bhóthair; Co. Átha Cliath; Éire

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:15 EDT