From: Peter Kirk (email@example.com)
Date: Mon Nov 10 2003 - 12:13:59 EST
On 10/11/2003 04:50, Michael Everson wrote:
> At 04:04 -0800 2003-11-10, Peter Kirk wrote:
>> Languages formerly written in Cyrillic are now being written in Latin
>> script with a one to one mapping. Proposals are in preparation for
>> extra Hebrew characters used by particular communities for western
>> languages which are more commonly written in Latin script. But if
>> these usages of the Latin and Hebrew alphabets are mere ciphers,
>> should they be supported by Unicode?
> Not if they are "mere ciphers".
But are they? This was the preceding question, which you didn't answer.
>> And then what about the use by Freemasons of the Samaritan script?
> Irrelevant. The Samaritan script is roadmapped already because of its
> real use.
So, if Masonic Samaritan script texts (no intention of secrecy there, by
the way) should be encoded as a cipher of Latin and not with the Unicode
Samaritan script, does that imply that Azerbaijani Latin texts should be
encoded as a cipher or Azerbaijani Cyrillic and not with Unicode Latin?
-- Peter Kirk firstname.lastname@example.org (personal) email@example.com (work) http://www.qaya.org/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Nov 10 2003 - 13:02:15 EST