From: brian@gael-image.com
Date: Fri Oct 17 2003 - 10:07:42 CST
It strikes me that number of users alone should not be cause to exclude a
script. I'm certain that many of you are familar with Michael Krauss'
landmark essay, "The World's Languages in Crisis" (1992), which estimates
that as many as half of the world's languages are spoken by fewer than
10,000 people each.
How many users of Ogham are there? (An bhfuil foilseachán ar bith sa lá atá
inniú ann clóbhuailte in Ogham?) Is there even one publication today that is
printed in Ogham? Why does Ogham qualify for entry but not Klingon?
It strikes me that the controversy about Klingon has more to do with it's
fictional origins than number of users.
Is this not true?
Quoting Doug Ewell <dewell@adelphia.net>:
> But it does NOT, under any circumstances, belong in Unicode proper. It
> has ONE USER that I am aware of, in all of history -- the one writing
> this message -- plus two other one-time users who have sent me e-mails
> in it. That does NOT justify adding it, along with all the other "pet
> fish" symbols and TAFKAP glyphs and things other high school kids have
> dreamed up, to a character encoding standard that will be implemented
> and used worldwide.
----- End forwarded message -----
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jan 18 2007 - 15:54:24 CST