From: Peter Kirk (peterkirk@qaya.org)
Date: Mon Nov 10 2003 - 13:49:59 EST
On 10/11/2003 10:36, John Hudson wrote:
> ...
> Well, Tifinagh is not a cipher and writing Tifinagh with a Latin
> cipher is a bad idea. But things like bidi properties are only an
> issue if you are employing a cipher at the glyph level. I've already
> explained why I think ciphers, masquerading and transliteration should
> be carried out at the character level, not the glyph level. So if, you
> example, you wanted to write English in the Hebrew script, you should
> convert Latin characters to Hebrew characters, not Latin glyphs to
> Hebrew glyphs.
Agreed. But if you want to write English with the Theban script, as
there are no Theban characters? Or what if you want to write English
with the RTL version of the Theban script which I found mentioned at
http://catb.org/~esr/unicode/theban/? That can't be done by glyph level
substitution.
-- Peter Kirk peter@qaya.org (personal) peterkirk@qaya.org (work) http://www.qaya.org/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Nov 10 2003 - 14:36:24 EST