From: saqqara (email@example.com)
Date: Sat May 22 2004 - 10:18:20 CDT
From: "Kenneth Whistler" Friday, May 21, 2004 12:51 AM
> If such is the case, then there *is* a need -- the question
> then just devolves to whether the need is significant enough
> for the UTC and WG2 to bother with it, and whether even if
> the need is met by encoding of characters, anyone will actually
> implement any relevant behavior in software or design fonts
> for it.
I hope to treat Phoenician in software and fonts at some point so do feel
free to add Saqqara to the list of potential developers.
Because I already work with scripts not yet in Unicode, I'm forced to work
with PUA, non-standard codings etc. anyway and write software that can cope
with this. So not totally desperate to see a separate script.
However if in *Unicode terms* Phoenician counts as a separate script, it
should be standardised as such whatever the customs and traditions of those
currently working with the material. That way it can be treated on a level
playing field with other scripts. As a non-expert it appears to me to be so
but remain open to the merits of the alternate cases.
I have previously mentioned here that if others feel unification is the way
to go, what would be most useful is a document defining what they regard as
the correct treatment in Unicode of 'Phoenician' texts, with references as
to how this is currently working among practitioners. Presumably those
active in the field have some informal standard they work with already to
enable information exchange. A reasoned document, not snippets of
argumentative email and people getting hot under the collar please.
I would also be interested in this from the perspective of my own software
work where I am amenable to helping work with established transliteration
schemes and the like, irrespective of the Unicode status of a given script.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat May 22 2004 - 10:15:11 CDT