RE: interleaved ordering (was RE: Phoenician)

Date: Fri May 14 2004 - 15:08:25 CDT

  • Next message: Dean Snyder: "RE: interleaved ordering (was RE: Phoenician)"

    Dean A. Snyder wrote,

    > The issue is not what we CAN do; the issue is what will we be FORCED to
    > do that already happens right now by default in operating systems,
    > Google, databases, etc. without any end user fiddling?

    That's the question.

    Since search engines like Google survive based on their ability to serve
    users' wants and find what users seek, why wouldn't Google make such
    a tailoring?

    I don't have any contacts at Google, so don't know who to ask.

    But, IMHO Google is one of the best search engines available. From
    observation, they seem to "roll with the punches" quite well. They
    seem to be "first" with multilingual and Unicode-based search
    capabilities, multilingual user interfaces, and they even have a beta
    translator which has given many hours of amusement.

    (Google interface in Hebrew, )

    Plus, they clearly *like* to be avant-garde, even if it takes a little
    extra work. (They also have user interfaces in Klingon and various
    other interesting languages. Although many of their language-based
    interfaces transliterate to Latin, one suspects that this is only
    because of the lack of widespread system support for many complex
    scripts, and that this will change when appropriate.)

    If giving Phoenician script and Hebrew script equivalence for searching
    purposes means that scholars can use their service to find what they
    want, it seems only natural that the good folks at Google would do
    the job right.
    > Obviously for the statistically fewer custom applications we would write
    > software.

    Although perhaps statistically fewer, it would seem to be just as
    obvious that the most useful applications in your work would be
    custom out of necessity.

    A custom application, for example, would allow the user to set
    a font for showing, say, cuneiform glyphs in the private use
    area to display custom file names. But, a default application
    might just substitute an inappropriate font willy-nilly.
    > But it would seem that encoding defaults should mirror script-user defaults.

    Would it be fair to say that people who don't use the Phoenician
    script aren't members of its user community?

    Best regards,

    James Kass

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri May 14 2004 - 15:09:12 CDT