From: Patrick Andries (Patrick.Andries@xcential.com)
Date: Fri Apr 30 2004 - 13:02:43 EDT
John Hudson a écrit :
> Again, I am not opposing the encoding of 'Phoenician': I just want to
> see the real issues resolved. To my mind, there is essentially only
> one major issue in encoding the ancient North Semitic script
> separately from Hebrew: how should users encode Palaeo-Hebrew texts?
> With the new codepoints, or with the Hebrew codepoints? The text is
> Hebrew, but the appropriate glyph forms are ancient North Semitic. I
> do think there is the possibility of significant confusion, which is
> not grounds for refusing to encode the ancient North Semitic script,
> but does suggest that a specific recommendation should be made, either
> in the TUS or by an appropriate and representative scholarly body.
I concur with John, I believe the Phoenician proposal is a good one and
a useful one (I'm partcularly more interested in the Punic and Neopunic
and I believe the Phoenician encoding is a much more natural one than
Hebrew). This said I would like to see Peter Kirk's issues addressed :
what to do with Paleo-Hebrew data which are -- if I understand properly
-- encoded with Hebrew codepoints and are considered as merely stylistic
variants of Hebrew.
P. A.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Apr 30 2004 - 14:30:57 EDT