From: Alexander Savenkov (email@example.com)
Date: Wed May 12 2004 - 08:30:23 CDT
2004-05-12T03:08:59+03:00 Eric Muller <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote:
> According to <www.eki.ee>, there is a currently an effort to convert the
> writing of Tatar from Cyrillic to Latin.
> 1. Does somebody have more information about that effort?
Perhaps it's their own effort.
> Eki lists four characters as needed but missing in Unicode (see
> 2. The case pair for barred o is encoded (U+019F and U+0275), and it
> seems that their confusion comes from less-than-perfect but annotated
> name for U+019F, and from the usage remark "African". Can we
> authoritatively tell them that those two characters are the ones they
> want? Can we add a "Tatar" usage remark to both?
Is there a need for this? You don't want to tell everyone on the net
about his or her wrong assumptions. There's one sentence in the page
you mentioned that gives a good description of this resource:
"The conversion from Cyrillic to Latin script is planned within years
This is false.
> 3. The case pair n with descender is definitely not encoded, and from my
> memory of the discussion of ghe with descender, we would want to encode
> them as separate characters (rather than with combining descenders on
> "n"). Is anybody working on that proposal?
There's no Latin Tatar script. It's the law. Full stop.
It's the Institute of Estonian language. I hope they know more about
Estonian than about other languages and Unicode.
> PS: sorry for the double post to unicode and unicore. However, given the
> current state of email@example.com, this seems the best course of action.
What's up with firstname.lastname@example.org?
-- Alexander Savenkov http://www.xmlhack.ru/ email@example.com http://www.xmlhack.ru/authors/croll/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed May 12 2004 - 08:30:51 CDT