Re: Zhuang tones three and four

Date: Wed Apr 30 2008 - 05:20:32 CDT

  • Next message: "Re: Fwd: Unicode on mobile devices"

    Quoting Andrew West <>:

    > 2008/4/29 Benjamin M Scarborough <>:
    >> John H. Jenkins said:
    >> > So are you looking to foster discussion on the subject? Or are you
    >> > trying to get the UTC to make the addition?
    >> I'm trying to foster discussion to get an idea of whether the
    >> disunification is appropriate. I'm pretty sure it is, but someone on
    >> the Unicode mailing list may have some good reason it isn't.
    > I don't know, how about
    > --invalidation of all existing data that uses this old Zhuang orthography,
    > --no obvious benefit to the user community (not that there is a big
    > user community since the orthography has now been superseded),

    There is virtually no user community for this script - the script was
    revised an tone 3 replaced by j and tone 4 by x.

    Also as Ken mentions usage has defined early on in unicode, and the
    obviously missing characters encoded.

    To make such a change would create problems for existing digital
    documents, the existing encoding model is certainly adequate for
    current needs, and needs for the forseeable future.

    I have never heard a Zhuang person express this as a matter of
    concern, though I have heard concern expressed over the many Zhuang
    CJK ideographs yet to be encoded (this is being worked on but is a
    somewhat slow process).

    John Knightley

    > --no request for disunification from the representatives of the user
    > community (i.e. China).
    > At any rate, if you want to take this further you will need to read
    > Annex F "Formal criteria for disunification" of the Principles and
    > Procedures document
    > <>
    > and assess the costs and benefits of disunification in this case.
    > Andrew

    This message sent through Virus Free Email

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Apr 30 2008 - 07:31:13 CDT