Re: There was this thing called Unicode...

From: Michael Everson (
Date: Tue Jul 09 2002 - 10:27:55 EDT

>everyone is much too busy discussing implementation of scripts in
>the ConScript registry which they admit will probably never be

I think the Phaistos discussion has been interesting and perhaps
instructive to some of the lurkers, because we've discussed the issue
fairly openly using some of the criteria to accept or reject
characters, name them, and opened a whole can of worms regarding
ancient script attestation, directionality, and modern font use.
These are interesting questions, and it is interesting to discuss
them. And it is potentially useful to MY work, which, as you know, is
to fill up Unicode with all kinds of wonderful alphabets and scripts
which the larger corporations may not take an interest in, but a
whole lot of regular folk do indeed.

Perhaps, pointless as you may think it, it hasn't been pointless at
all. I made a Unicode font using PUA code positions and it was tested
in a number of browsers on a number of different platforms. Having
made that font, and having it work, was a step forward. And putting
Phaistos in the CSUR was a kindness to people who do take an interest
in the script, and there are an awful lot of pages out there which do.

>getting remedial CSS lessons

Sorry I'm not a clever programmer like you are, MichKa, but you could
be a little less snotty. :-) In point of fact, I hadn't bothered to
mark the font in my first draft of the Phaistos text, and OmniWeb
under OS X read it anyway because the two are clever about knowing
what characters are in the fonts available. Other browsers and OSes
aren't as smart, so I added the font tag. That's not recommended, but
CSS is, and frankly I find the CSS specification rather bizarre and
certainly not user-friendly, which is why I have not studied it
assiduously. I have had other things to do, like reading N'Ko and New
Tai Lue dictionaries looking for ordering data.

It's summer. We're indulging ourselves a little, but it's not as
pointless as you would have it, and you could be a bit more patient
with us. We're just as serious about Unicode as you are.

Michael Everson *** Everson Typography ***

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 09 2002 - 09:22:08 EDT