Re: Gaps in Brahmic Allocations (was: Tamil Collation vs Transliteration/Transcription Enc)

From: Michael Everson (
Date: Sun Jun 26 2005 - 09:12:07 CDT

  • Next message: N. Ganesan: "Re: Tamil Collation vs Transliteration/Transcription Encoding"

    At 20:42 +0100 2005-06-25, Richard Wordingham wrote:

    >I had always seen the gaps as forward planning, either for future
    >parallel developments, or for archaic letters as the use of the
    >script was found to encompass older practices.

    No, it was just ISCII.

    >However, the resuscitation or recognition of normatively discarded
    >letters may be seen as harmful - we're seeing a Tamil view, and
    >there may be a similar Lao view.

    We are not seeing a representative Tamil view. And under no
    circumstances will we AVOID encoding historical letters if there is a
    genuine need for them. This is the Universal Character Set.

    >I can't help wondering if some of the spelling reforms (Lao, Tai
    >Lue) have had a hidden agenda of breaking links to a Pali heritage.

    I think this highly unlikely.

    Michael Everson * * Everson Typography *  *

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Jun 26 2005 - 09:30:41 CDT