Re: Response to Everson Phoenician and why June 7?

From: Patrick Andries (Patrick.Andries@xcential.com)
Date: Thu May 20 2004 - 16:59:52 CDT

  • Next message: Philippe Verdy: "Re: ISO 15924 draft fixes"

    James Kass a écrit :

    >Ernest Cline wrote,
    >
    >
    >
    >>>In order for Phoenician to be "disunified" from Hebrew, it must
    >>>first have been unified with Hebrew. This is not the case.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>Well then, nonunification if you wish to be picky about it.
    >>
    >>
    >
    >Sorry if I offended. Many on this list have referred to the current
    >proposal as a "disunification" and seem to be arguing that accepting
    >this proposal would change and disrupt current Unicoding practices.
    >
    >In this case, I think it's important to be picky because there are
    >no current Unicoding practices for Phoenician.
    >
    You may mean that the Unicode book does not document how Phoenician (or
    Paleo-Hebrew) may be encoded. This is not to say that no one is using
    Unicode to encode Paleo-Hebrew texts.

    P. A.

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu May 20 2004 - 17:00:42 CDT