From: Philippe Verdy (
Date: Sat Oct 22 2005 - 17:25:56 CST

  • Next message: Philippe Verdy: "Re: LAO LETTER FO SUNG and LAO LETTER FO TAM"

    From: "Richard Wordingham" <>
    > Actually, the statement 'Based on TIS 620-2529' in the character chart
    > reinforces the identity.

    "Based on" does not mean that it directly maps the standard with a simple
    code translation. This is not stated anywhere in the standard.

    Also, how can it come that a Thai standard applies to the Lao script? I did
    not know that TIS defined a standard for writing Lao as well. I should have
    noticed and remembered this line at the top of the Lao chart, but I wonder
    if it is really correct, or if this was a sort of "unification" by Unicode
    and ISO/IEC 10646 they they studied both scripts simultaneously and decided
    to encode them with the same encoding scheme based on the Thai standard.

    If so, this may explain the confusion introduced in Lao: the Lao script was
    encoded by too many non-experts, that were only expert in Thai. This gives
    some lessons for encoding further scripts or letters: their normative names
    should be first submitted in a public review before they are voted. The
    principles of encoding should already be there, as well as the number of
    letters to accept, but this beta phase is necessary before final approval.

    There are too few people involved in the voting process at the ISO working
    group, whose work is too much opaque for the general public, as it is only
    open to governmental representants. So if there are new votes in the ISO
    10646 pipe, I really suggest that some voting ISO members publish the paper
    they have to vote on, to receive informed public review before they can
    effectively vote.

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Oct 22 2005 - 17:29:08 CST