From: Michael Everson (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Wed Apr 05 2006 - 03:32:21 CST
At 08:56 +0200 2006-04-05, Karl Pentzlin wrote:
>ME> I wouldn't preallocate more space for the Phaistos Disc characters.
>ME> We may never ever find any more.
>But, if the Phaistos Disc symbol set is encoded, and a second disk
>is unearthed (within the next 3,500 years or even before the next UTC
>meeting) containing at least one symbol hitherto unknown,
>then there will raise a lot more discussion in the literature, needing
>of course an encoding of the new symbol(s). This may seem unlikely after
>digging 98 years in vain, but cannot be proven impossible.
And we can allocate another block somewhere else in the SMP for
PHAISTOS DISC EXTENSIONS. This is no different from what we did for
Ethiopic, or Georgian, or Coptic, or Latin, etc. But if more Phaistos
characters are discovered, there is no way of knowing whether it will
be 2, or 40.
>btw, I prefer the term "symbols" resp. "symbol set" to "characters"
>resp. "script", as thhe Phaistos Disc is not yet proven to show
>"characters" of a "script".
The character names proposed are PHAISTOS DISC SIGN xxx.
>Personally, I see the reason for a encoding the Phaistos Disc symbol
>set like the reason for encoding Chess symbols (U+2654...U+265F) or
>Tai Xuan Jing symbols (U+1D300...U+1D35F): There is a well-defined
>symbol set which is needed by a wide user community in plain text.
I am glad you agree. :-)
-- Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Apr 05 2006 - 03:41:40 CST