Re: Major Defect in Combining Classes of Tibetan Vowels

From: Michael \(michka\) Kaplan (michka@trigeminal.com)
Date: Wed Jun 25 2003 - 16:30:53 EDT

  • Next message: Kenneth Whistler: "Re: Major Defect in Combining Classes of Tibetan Vowels"

    Thank you for [indirectly] making my point for me. I am saying that if
    someone has an issue that *does* make a difference then they should bring it
    up.

    Otherwise, I say that a difference that makes no difference, make no
    difference. And we can move on to actual problems. :-)

    MichKa

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: <Peter_Constable@sil.org>
    To: <unicode@unicode.org>
    Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 1:08 PM
    Subject: Re: Major Defect in Combining Classes of Tibetan Vowels

    > Michael Kaplan wrote on 06/25/2003 10:55:47 AM:
    >
    > > Let me add that this was the case recently for Hebrew (to mention on
    > > example). So it is certainly not impossible.
    >
    > The Hebrew issue is different: that involves things that *are* visually
    > distinct, and that distinction cannot be represented in a reliable manner.
    >
    >
    > - Peter
    >
    >
    > --------------------------------------------------------------------------
    -
    > Peter Constable
    >
    > Non-Roman Script Initiative, SIL International
    > 7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd., Dallas, TX 75236, USA
    > Tel: +1 972 708 7485
    >
    >
    >

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jun 25 2003 - 17:12:56 EDT