Klingon

From: Chris Jacobs ([email protected])
Date: Thu Jan 15 2004 - 05:15:33 EST

Next message: Peter Kirk: "Re: New MS Mac Office and Unicode?"

Previous message: Andrew C. West: "Re: U+0185 in Zhuang and Azeri (was Re: unicode Digest V4 #3)"
In reply to: Mark E. Shoulson: "Re: Cuneiform - Dynamic vs. Static"
Next in thread: John Cowan: "Re: Klingon"
Reply: John Cowan: "Re: Klingon"
Reply: Michael Everson: "Re: Klingon"
Maybe reply: Kenneth Whistler: "Re: Klingon"
Maybe reply: Philippe Verdy: "Re: Klingon"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

----- Original Message -----
From: "Mark E. Shoulson" <[email protected]>
To: "Philippe Verdy" <[email protected]>
Cc: "Deborah Goldsmith" <[email protected]>; "Unicode List" <[email protected]>
Sent: Thursday, January 15, 2004 3:20 AM
Subject: Re: Cuneiform - Dynamic vs. Static

> I had a problem with this too, for a while (previous discussion on this
> list helped clear it up). Klingon letters had been placed in the PUA by
> the CSUR (ConsScript Unicode Registry, an unofficial allocation of PUA
> space to constructed alphabets),

Really?

And did the Klingon Language Institute endorse that?

Next message: Peter Kirk: "Re: New MS Mac Office and Unicode?"
Previous message: Andrew C. West: "Re: U+0185 in Zhuang and Azeri (was Re: unicode Digest V4 #3)"
In reply to: Mark E. Shoulson: "Re: Cuneiform - Dynamic vs. Static"
Next in thread: John Cowan: "Re: Klingon"
Reply: John Cowan: "Re: Klingon"
Reply: Michael Everson: "Re: Klingon"
Maybe reply: Kenneth Whistler: "Re: Klingon"
Maybe reply: Philippe Verdy: "Re: Klingon"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jan 15 2004 - 06:15:59 EST