RE: Unicode 5.1, Egyptian Transliteration, and Fonts

From: Kenneth Whistler (
Date: Mon Dec 03 2007 - 18:24:30 CST

  • Next message: Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven: "Re: vim and Arabic/Farsi support"

    Bob Richmond suggested:

    > So unless there are any compelling reasons to do otherwise, I agree that we
    > should proceed with this convention and Unicode data files and documentation
    > should be adjusted accordingly.
    > Ideally this would be incorporated in the Unicode 5.1 release, thereby
    > completing the traditional 'Egyptian transliteration' set.

    Such things (in this case, the suggestion that
    U+0486 have a property change Script=Cyrillic --> Script=Inherited)
    only happen if a specific proposal to do so is prepared
    and tabled for the UTC, along with a request for an agenda
    item to discuss and decide upon it.

    Given that Unicode 5.1 is in process now (see the beta
    review announcement on the site), there is only *one*
    UTC meeting available where such a change could be
    decided on -- the one at the beginning of February next
    year -- for it to have any chance to appear in Unicode 5.1.

    And since this is proposing a property change for an
    existing character that has long had the property it
    has, simply providing beta review feedback (which focusses
    more on the properties for the newly added characters)
    wouldn't be enough.

    Making suggestions on the list doesn't
    actually accomplish any change in the standard, unless
    it is followed up formally with the UTC.


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Dec 03 2007 - 18:30:21 CST