From: Philippe Verdy (email@example.com)
Date: Thu May 20 2004 - 16:05:52 CDT
From: "Peter Constable" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> Could someone please explain why the data tables for ISO 15924 list both
> "codes" and "ID"s? ("ID"s are not discussed in the text of the
My opinion is that "Codes" where defined to be locale-neutral, and easily
parsable in locale identifiers, with their fixed format.
The "IDs" are inherited from Unicode UAX #24 and Unicode Properties... and
needed for compatibility. If view IDs as aliases of "Codes", and no interest in
adding new "IDs" for UAX #24 in the future, the absence of ID meaning that there
will be no more alias defined for new scripts in Unicode.
This means that future standardized scripts for Unicode (for example Phoenician
if it is accepted), will use the now defined ISO-15924 "Phnx" code in Unicode
character properties, without attempting to add a new "Phoenician" value which
would have to be added in the ISO-15924 code list (I think it is useless to
change something only to add aliases for new codes that Unicode has still not
defined and used).
Am I wrong?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu May 20 2004 - 16:06:27 CDT