Re: Encoding of script variants, was: Semitic scripts and script variants

From: Asmus Freytag (
Date: Thu Jun 03 2004 - 18:18:43 CDT

  • Next message: John Cowan: "OT: John Cowan announces the "Unix Power Classic""

    At 10:30 AM 6/3/2004, Peter Kirk wrote:
    >>I think it's up to you to develop a workable alternative to parallel
    >>coding, if you think that would be preferable.
    >Well, I have suggested several alternatives, only to have them all shouted
    >down by Michael and rejected by Ken. ... So perhaps someone else can
    >suggest an acceptable alternative, for the very real need

    I don't see 'a very real need' here.

    >(if not for Phoenician, for some other cases) of encoding script variants,
    >as defined in I
    >note from section 4.2 of this draft that:
    >>Identification of such script variants, while outside the scope of
    >>ISO/IEC 10646, is relevant to the content of script codes.

    There is more than one definition of script - we've gone over that ground

    >Does this imply that script variants should not be identified in Unicode
    >plain text? That has implications for proposals for new scripts.

    Not all bibliographically relevant variants need to be encoded in plain text.

    >>As the discussion has gone on for a long time on the list and has
    >>involved only a small number of participants, I suggest that you contact
    >>the interested parties offline.
    >There are two good reasons for keeping this on the list:

    I disagree:

    1) I don't see this as a new discussion, but a way to wring life out of a
    beaten-to-death one.

    2) Most successful proposals have been developed off the list.


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jun 03 2004 - 18:20:25 CDT