From: Michael Everson (everson@evertype.com)
Date: Tue May 11 2004 - 06:39:30 CDT
At 07:34 -0700 2004-05-10, Peter Kirk wrote:
>Is there any really good reason not to mix two scripts, which are
>according to many people actually variants of one script but which
>are (if your proposal is accepted) seperately encoded for the
>convenience of some scholars?
Yes. The default template is for default behaviour. Most people in
the world use a tiny subset of characters available, and don't care
much about what happens in scripts which are not their own. This sort
of battle was fought over Runic: Runologists wanted the Runes to be
sorted in Latin alphabetical order, but this didn't make sense to the
other clients of the script. The Latin ordering is considered to be a
special tailoring.
>This sounds to me like the kind of rule which is made to be broken.
>If all the 22 CSWA scripts are collated together by default, this
>would significantly reduce the objections to encoding them as
>separate scripts.
I would have just as many objections to doing that as I would with
unifying it with Hebrew. Users don't expect this kind of interfiling
when looking things up in ordered lists. Interfiling of scripts
impedes legibility.
-- Michael Everson * * Everson Typography * * http://www.evertype.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue May 11 2004 - 06:40:23 CDT