From: Michael Everson (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Fri Apr 30 2004 - 14:48:38 EDT
At 09:49 -0700 2004-04-30, John Hudson wrote:
>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
You would encode the text in Phoenician script if you wanted to
encode it in the script in which it was originally written. You would
encode the text in Hebrew script if you wanted to encode it in the
script in which it was later written (after the Exile) and if you
wanted to encode it in the script in which it is currently written.
encode a Pali text in Brahmi script or Devanagari script, etc.
-- Michael Everson * * Everson Typography * * http://www.evertype.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Apr 30 2004 - 15:45:42 EDT