Re: New contribution

From: Ernest Cline (
Date: Sat May 01 2004 - 12:23:26 CST

 From: C J Fynn <>
> Peter Constable <>
> > > Compare for instance Kannada and Telugu which share a common
> > > origin in the not so distant past - and are still very near
identical -
> > > yet are encoded in their own ranges.
> >
> > They do have distinct behaviours and rendering requirements.
> >
> I may be wrong but aren't the different behaviours between these two
> based on differences in the requirements of the (main) languages written
> these scripts rather than substantial differences in the scripts
themselves? If
> say the same Sanskrit text is written in both Telugu and Kannada scripts
> these different behaviours apply?

There is one significant difference between Kannada and Telugu that
made them ill-suited for unification, even if ISCII compatibility had not
a goal. The vowel signs II, EE, O, and OO are decomposable characters
in Kannada. They aren't decomposable in Telugu. That is a significant
difference that would have required at the very least using a different
encoding philosophy for the Indic scripts than that which was used, if
unification was to have been considered.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri May 07 2004 - 18:45:25 CDT