From: George W Gerrity (email@example.com)
Date: Sat Jun 23 2007 - 01:45:33 CDT
Thank you, Asmus. You have summarised my position exactly. Pity I
also answered in in a long-winded way before I read yours.
On 2007-06-23, at 15:00, Asmus Freytag wrote:
> On 6/22/2007 9:20 PM, Marnen Laibow-Koser wrote:
>> OK...now that we're getting closer to list topic...
>>> Even if these ancients did have a separate set of symbols for
>>> base 60, say, we have no need of them.
>> On this I could not disagree with you more, particularly if there
>> is a scholarly community studying these texts.
> If there is an existing set of symbols in use by some community,
> that would be worthy of investigation for encoding. George makes
> that point that the (modern) community does not use such symbols to
> discuss the concepts in the old texts. Where symbols exist in the
> old texts themselves, they are worthy of investigation for encoding
> in their own right - and I suspect for the scripts in question,
> that is being done / has been done as part of the task of encoding
> these ancient scripts.
>>> I have an article somewhere that discusses computations and
>>> computational algorithms used by the ancients, even translating
>>> the source text into English, with illustrations of the
>>> computations involved. The author of this article found no need
>>> to use symbols other than 0–9 to talk about the computations.
>> Sure. But (again assuming that these symbols exist as
>> hypothesized) that is at best a transliteration. Your argument --
>> if I understand it correctly -- is similar to saying that because
>> we can represent Bengali unambiguously in Roman transliteration,
>> we don't need to encode Bengali script in Unicode.
> No, his argument is, that for purposes of discussing these
> concepts, the modern community uses modern symbols and therefore
> there is no need to hypothesize. Looking at what "might" be is not
> useful - it is much more practical to research what is, and then
> one can start to worry about whether and how this translates into
> new character codes.
Dr George W Gerrity Ph: +61 2 6386 3431
GWG Associates Fax: +61 2 6386 4431
P O Box 229 Time: +10 hours (ref GMT)
Harden, NSW 2587 PGP RSA Public Key Fingerprint:
AUSTRALIA 73EF 318A DFF5 EB8A 6810 49AC 0763 AF07
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Jun 23 2007 - 01:49:58 CDT