Re: U+0BA3, U+0BA9

From: Michael Everson (
Date: Sun Oct 26 2003 - 10:33:35 CST

>At 02:08 PM 10/25/03 -0700, Doug Ewell wrote:

>>The Unicode character names attempt to be (a) unique and (b) reasonably
>>mnemonic. Anything beyond that is a bonus. They expressly do *not*
>>represent any form of transliteration or transcription scheme.

That doesn't mean that some of our conventions aren't based on rules
related to various transliteration or transcription schemes.

Michael Everson * * Everson Typography *  *

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jan 18 2007 - 15:54:24 CST