From: Addison Phillips (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sat Oct 13 2007 - 17:29:25 CDT
> O'Donncaoa (PCL Institute) wrote:
>> I'm involved with a project that is creating a new alphabetic
>> orthography. The orthography is quite new, and not another exists for
>> the language. I'm about to float the completed proposal summary for
>> the script to this newsgroup for review. The process will minimally
>> take two, and be more like 3 years before the script shall be able to
>> be incorporated into the Unicode standard.
One small observation: a new orthography does not necessarily require a
new script be encoded. Many new orthographies are associated with or
adapt the use of existing scripts. If you're using an existing script,
you don't need the PUA at all.
In fact, you might want to consider using an existing script anyway,
adapting it to the particular requirements of the language and
orthography in question. You may find that an existing script even has
the orthographic features that you need (there are a lot of scripts in
One reason to consider this is that existing scripts already have
support in fonts, software, keyboards, and the like. Lack of this kind
of support often forms an impediment to adoption far more difficult (and
slower) to address than mere encoding of the characters.
Of course, I say this with absolutely no knowledge of your new
orthography or requirements.
-- Addison Phillips Globalization Architect -- Yahoo! Inc. Chair -- W3C Internationalization Core WG Internationalization is an architecture. It is not a feature.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Oct 13 2007 - 17:31:03 CDT