Re: Writing Tatar using the Latin script; new characters to encode?

From: Alexander Savenkov (
Date: Wed May 12 2004 - 08:30:23 CDT

  • Next message: Kent Karlsson: "RE: interleaved ordering (was RE: Phoenician)"


    2004-05-12T03:08:59+03:00 Eric Muller <> wrote:

    > According to <>, 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, this seems the best course of action.

    What's up with

      Alexander Savenkov                     

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed May 12 2004 - 08:30:51 CDT