From: Patrick Andries (Patrick.Andries@xcential.com)
Date: Fri May 07 2004 - 11:08:26 CDT
Peter Constable a écrit :
>>>[PA] I also got this feedback from Lionel Galand (of Tifinagh and Libyan
>>>fame) about Punic : «Je peux vous dire que j'ai souvent travaillé sur
>>>des répertoires de documents puniques qui étaient publiés en caractères
>>This could be multiplied a hundredfold.
>The same could be said of Devanagari or Arabic text published in Roman transcription. That does not mean that we do not encode Devanagari or Arabic, or that encoding those scripts prevents the same people from continuing to publish in Roman transcription.
[PA] True. Just stating it is a common practice. People will not be
unsettled by a plain text unification.
Personally, I'm still not very convinced there is anything to be gained
by having two ways of encoding large documents bases as the Dead Sea
Scrolls. I would have encoded these texts as Dean Snyder suggested (my
CSS/XSLT bias I supposed) : one underlying encoding, different
rendering. But I'm no specialist in Semitic (or otherwise Indo-European
for that matter) studies.
Just an inkling, not a dogmatic conviction.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri May 07 2004 - 18:45:26 CDT