Re: Tamil sha (U+0BB6) - deprecate it?

From: Michael \(michka\) Kaplan (
Date: Tue Jun 28 2005 - 16:51:16 CDT

  • Next message: Gregg Reynolds: "[Fwd: Re: A Tamil-Roman transliterator (Unicode)]"

    Note that the first paragraph of my response below is factual, verifiable
    information (details available by request from anyone who asks for them
    offline). The rest of my response is tongue and cheek humor based on these
    provable, verifiable facts, meant only to provide a lighter side to the
    "conflict" that has dominated this thread....

    From: "Peter Kirk" <>

    > Nevertheless, if U+0BB6 is actually used in writing, even if not by some
    > purists, it does need to be encoded and should not be deprecated.

    Another good reason to not deprecate it is that it was requested by an
    organization that represents Tamil interests in Sri Lanka, Singapore,
    Malaysia, and Tamilnadu. The "oppressors" are therefore not Unicode, and not
    Uma, and not I (though Uma and I helped to press for good usage samples!).
    Srivas himself is a member of this organization, and the very working group
    that produced the proposal. In fact, he even was involved in many of the
    email list conversations about U+0bb6.

    Therefore not only oppressed himself, but also viciously did not properly
    inform himself of what he was doing when he did it.

    People who are not within his reach are likely safe for the time being. But
    someone may want to intervene before he beats himself up for these crimes
    (since he knows where he lives, he is simply not safe from himself).

    (flashing back to a Monty Python skit where Colin "Bomber" Harris managed to
    beat his opponent unconscious in an important wrestling match where he faced
    himself in the ring)


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Jun 28 2005 - 16:52:12 CDT