From: Peter Kirk (email@example.com)
Date: Tue Feb 03 2004 - 19:41:35 EST
On 03/02/2004 15:29, D. Starner wrote:
>In any case, the vast majority of people working with cuniform would use
>a transliteration, likely even written on their paper files. To use real
>cuniform is a "because-I-can" thing, which I am not personally insensible,
>but doesn't get the highest priority bug fixes.
Dean and others working with him prefer not to use transliteration. Why
should they be forced to? Your allegation that it is a "because-I-can"
thing may well be totally unfounded. If a Chinese person uses Chinese
characters rather than Pinyin, is that a "because-I-can" thing?
>>You may not think what Dean
>>and his colleagues were doing was very sensible, but it obviously made
>>sense to them, so what was the point of banning it?
>The point of banning it, if I understand it right, was that the old way
>didn't work right when viewing PUA data under all circumstances, and
>the only way was, as Dean put it, to uninstall fonts and rearrange
>codepoints. To enable the functionality in text editors, they had an
>unexpected side-effect of breaking PUA characters in file names. Which
>way to go is obvious to me.
From how I understand what Dean wrote, the issue is a very simple one.
What he wanted did work in Jaguar. It doesn't work in Panther. He is
unhappy about that.
-- Peter Kirk firstname.lastname@example.org (personal) email@example.com (work) http://www.qaya.org/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Feb 03 2004 - 20:32:39 EST