Re: New contribution

From: John Hudson (
Date: Thu Apr 29 2004 - 22:10:20 EDT

  • Next message: John Hudson: "Re: New contribution"

    Michael Everson wrote:

    > At 10:34 -0700 2004-04-29, Peter Kirk wrote:
    >> But what answer do you have to my point, made in more detail
    >> elsewhere, that it will cause total confusion, and defeat the purposes
    >> of Unicode, if some people use the new characters and others don't?

    > Frankly I'd say it's an unreasonable suggestion on your part. NO ONE is
    > forced to use Sinhala, Brahmi, Myanmar, or Devanagari script to
    > represent Buddhist texts in Pali. Scholars, and the Pali Text Society,
    > happily ignore these scripts and use Latin. Similarly, NO ONE will be
    > forced to use Phoenician script to represent early Phoenician language
    > if they find it hard to read and prefer to represent it in Hebrew
    > script, or in Latin.

    Michael, Peter is not talking about the Phoenician language being represented in the
    Hebrew script, he is talking about the common practice of semiticists to *encode* the
    Phoenician script using Hebrew codepoints. The representation of the text is in Phoenician
    glyphs, not Hebrew, but these glyphs are treated as typeface variants of Hebrew.

    At first, I too thought Peter was talking about transliteration into Hebrew script, but
    today I realised that he was talking about encoding Phoenician glyphs as Hebrew characters.

    John Hudson

    Tiro Typeworks
    Vancouver, BC
    I often play against man, God says, but it is he who wants
       to lose, the idiot, and it is I who want him to win.
    And I succeed sometimes
    In making him win.
                  - Charles Peguy

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Apr 29 2004 - 22:52:29 EDT