Re: Glyph Stance

From: Rick McGowan (
Date: Fri May 28 2004 - 11:18:52 CDT

  • Next message: Peter Kirk: "Re: PH technical issues (was RE: Why Fraktur is irrelevant"

    Bob Richmond discussed...

    > Recap. Michaels 'n1944' proposal for Egyptian Hieroglyphs in Unicode
    > (1999)

    Just FYI, the control codes were a rather controversial feature of that
    proposal. It would also be worth surveying (again) the use of controls in
    existing Egyptian implementations.

    > I understand the UTC position was in favour of coding a basic
    > (partial-Gardiner) character set but deferring the larger corpus
    > and control elements. This would have been useful and fine to
    > build on incrementally but IMO 5 years on, it is not only
    > possible but highly desirable to go further than this.

    UTC at last check was still in favor of encoding the Gardiner set, minus
    control codes, just as soon as someone is able to come up with a revised
    proposal for the 700+ characters. Funding and time are the current
    inhibitors to work on the proposal, as I understand it. And I'm afraid at
    this point, Egyptian is nowhere near being encoded.


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri May 28 2004 - 11:19:26 CDT