Re: Fraktur yet again (was: Re: Response to Everson Phoenician and why June 7?)

From: Dean Snyder (
Date: Tue May 25 2004 - 11:02:11 CDT

  • Next message: Michael Everson: "Re: Fraktur Legibility (was Re: Response to Everson Phoenician)"

    Michael Everson wrote at 4:01 PM on Tuesday, May 25, 2004:

    >At 10:12 -0400 2004-05-25, Dean Snyder wrote:
    > Michael Everson
    >> >>>In any case we're encoding the significant nodes
    >> >>>in your *diascript. Similarly, Swedish, Bokmål,
    >> >>>Nynorsk, and Danish are distinguished, as are the
    >> >>>Romance languages.
    >> >>
    >> >>Are you saying that Swedish, Danish, and the
    >>>>Romance languages are not unified in Unicode?
    >>>Are you being deliberately obtuse?
    >Then go back and re-read the entire context because you have got it wrong.

    I have already read it and it sounds like you're saying Romance and
    Scandinavian are not unified in Unicode, or as you put it "Similarly
    [they] are distinguished". (And the context is about significant nodes on
    a script continuum that should or should not be distinguished in separate

    If I am misunderstanding you, could you please make it clearer what you


    Dean A. Snyder

    Assistant Research Scholar
    Manager, Digital Hammurabi Project
    Computer Science Department
    Whiting School of Engineering
    218C New Engineering Building
    3400 North Charles Street
    Johns Hopkins University
    Baltimore, Maryland, USA 21218

    office: 410 516-6850
    cell: 717 817-4897

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue May 25 2004 - 11:01:53 CDT