From: R.C. Bakhuizen van den Brink [Rein] (email@example.com)
Date: Wed Apr 28 2004 - 01:03:50 EDT
what's the problem here? I might have missed something or have
stumbled upon an age-old discussion that has been solved lightyears ago?
Would you need to have the same web-text [in HTML] displayed
in Romanian as well as in Cyrillic script according to
the reader's wishes?
Or let's say - in a similar border situation but using Latin
script only - have Polish 'cz' automatically represent
Czech 'Ť'? And vice versa. Thus establishing a 1-1-relationship
between pre-composed and composables?
On Tue, 27 Apr 2004, Peter Kirk wrote:
>On 27/04/2004 12:25, Peter Constable wrote:
>>Since we're talking about Romanian...
>>Prior to 1991, the Soviet-controlled administration attempted to create
>>a distinct linguistic identity, Moldovian, which as I understand it
>>basically amounted to Romanian written in Cyrillic script. (They tried
>>to introduce some archaic Romanian forms and Russian loans, but
>>apparently none of it stuck.)
>>How relevant is Romanian in Cyrillic script at this point? For instance,
>>what's the likelihood that someone might want to put Romanian-Cyrillic
>>content on the web? Already being done? A reasonable possibility?
>Would Romanian Cyrillic actually be anything different from Moldovian?
>On the same lines, I have seen Turkish written in Cyrillic, I think for
>the use of Turks living in Bulgaria, so you will need to allow for that.
>In the same geographical area, Gagauz is I think written in both Latin
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Apr 28 2004 - 01:26:24 EDT