From: Philippe Verdy (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Thu Jun 02 2005 - 09:05:38 CDT
From: "Antoine Leca" <Antoine10646@leca-marti.org>
> On Wednesday, June 1st, 2005 12:21Z Dominikus Scherkl wrote:
>>>> - - ligature processing is a required feature to support
>>>> even legacy ISO 8859 charsets like Arabic, or Indian
>>>> standard charsets (ISCII).
> Philippe, please remember that ISCII does not imply a script. In fact, RMN
> (that is, Latin script) is an available choice to render ISCII.
Yes I know, and I did not use the term "script" but "Indian standard
charsets". This is really different...
A "charset" is definitely not a script, but an encoded subset of abstract
characters, possibly belonging to one or more scripts, and serialized on a
plain-text stream with a predefinite order and predefined values of bytes.
(Yes, there's another, probably better, definition of "charset" for use in
the IANA registry and in HTML/XML, and another one for Unicode itself in its
normative character model).
And I did not imply that Latin characters were needed in those Indian ISCII
charsets, just that most of these charsets (as well as Arabic) already need
a ligature processing system, now implemented in most "standard" renderers.
So the technology is already there, and it seems unreasonable to not use it
when rendering Latin, even without any reference to Indian and Arabic
scripts (please don't tell me what is a "Indian" script, we all know that
this covers *several* encoded and unencoded scripts with Brahmic origin,
with some very widely used and some extremely rare or extinct, used in a
region extending West, North, and East of India as well up to South-East
Asia and South China or Tibet, or even some rare melanesian scripts used in
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jun 02 2005 - 09:06:48 CDT