From: Страхиња Радић (email@example.com)
Date: Tue Jun 28 2005 - 13:59:21 CDT
Дана 2005.06.15 13:31, Michael Everson је написао:
> >1. Glagolitic jery is not a character: it is two characters. This
> >was the unanimous view of those who participated in the consultation
And whom that may be?
> >2. People who work with square glagolitic were insistant that the
> >stapic (which is what they call it, hence the name) should be
> >included, and if you look at their publications you will see that
> >they are always careful to transcribe it as a distinct character.
Any examples of historical use?
> >3. Latinate myslite is necessary for encoding those texts in which
> >it occurs together with the older form of myslite.
Дана 2005.06.14 04:02, Doug Ewell је написао:
> I'm glad that the lack of a GLAGOLITIC LETTER YERIY seems to be 90% of
> Strahinya's objection to the Glagolitic encoding. I had thought his
> opposition ran much deeper than that.
Well, my ``opposition'' runs deeper indeed, but I am also aware of the
policy of not allowing modifications, only additions. The addition of ``yeriy''
is all I can ask regarding this problem.
The system applied for transcribing Old Slavic to Latin in general
seems very odd to me (U=both ``Ъ'' and ``У'', I=both ``Ь'' and ``И''??). So,
instead of ``AZ'', ``BUKI'', ``VYEDI'', and so on, we have ``AZU'', ``BUKY'',
``VEDE'', etc. But that cannot be changed, so I don't complain about it.
> If he can put together a decent proposal for this letter, including some
> examples that clearly show its identity as a single letter, I'm sure it
> would be considered on its merits.
Every book on Old Slavic lists all the Old Cyrillic and Glagolitic
letters and their corresponding names, including ``yeriy''. So I am very
curious who are the people that ``participated in the consultation process''
and are there any slavists among them.
Again, thinking like that, supposing that deletions were allowed, we
could remove the letter ``W'', because it can be represented with ``VV''. Or,
the CJK part could be ``optimized'' by including only radicals and complements,
as ``every CJK character could be represented by combining these basic
Is the lack of Glagolitic typewriting machines with ``yeriy'' really
the only reason this character wasn't included? Is this a joke? In my opinion,
the very fact that I have to *prove* ``yeriy'' is a standalone character is
surreal. Does the combination ``GLAGOLI+LJUDIJE'' has a separate name? No. But
``yeriy'' has, because it is a character representing a sound.
-- ---------------------------- http://www.gnu.org/home.html Because *freedom* matters! ----------------------------
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Jun 28 2005 - 15:08:58 CDT