Re: Biblical Hebrew

From: John Hudson (
Date: Fri Jun 27 2003 - 18:18:15 EDT

  • Next message: Kenneth Whistler: "Re: Biblical Hebrew"

    At 01:45 PM 6/27/2003, Philippe Verdy wrote:

    >I understand the frustration:

    Similar to the frustration of having private, off-list messages replied to
    in public.

    > if Unicode had not attempted to define
    >combining classes, which were not necessary to Unicode, all
    >existing combining characters would have been given a CC=0
    >(or all the same 220 or 230 value). This would have left the
    >compatibility with legacy encodings and with Modern Hebrew,
    >without breaking Traditional Hebrew.

    Combining classes are useful and normalisation is a good thing that reduces
    the number of possible encodings of equivalent character sequences. This is
    very important and valuable during search and sort operations, and greatly
    reduces processing time.

    I have nothing at all against either normalisation or combining classes.

    John Hudson

    Tiro Typeworks
    Vancouver, BC

    If you browse in the shelves that, in American bookstores,
    are labeled New Age, you can find there even Saint Augustine,
    who, as far as I know, was not a fascist. But combining Saint
    Augustine and Stonehenge -- that is a symptom of Ur-Fascism.
                                                                 - Umberto Eco

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jun 27 2003 - 18:58:07 EDT