Re: [unicode] Re: Siddham

Date: Wed May 21 2008 - 04:04:48 CDT

  • Next message: Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven: "Re: Siddham"


    On Wed, 21 May 2008 09:46:05 +0200
    Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven <> wrote:

    >-On [20080511 15:43], Jeroen Ruigrok van der Werven ( wrote:
    >>I see Michael Everson has a proposal for Siddham worked out, yet why is it
    >>not even in consideration for inclusion yet?

    I can find a chart of Siddam script on evertype site,
    but it's for the discussion and it doesn't have the
    coverpages to submit ISO/IEC JTC1/SC2/WG2 officially.
    About the roadmap from evertype to ISO/IEC JTC1/SC2/WG2,
    please ask it to Michael Everson. I'm not sure if he
    could collect the people to discuss with.

    >No one has even a vague idea of why not? :-\

    Please check Script Encoding Initiative's page:


    It has a note about Brahmi-derivative scripts that
    unified Brahmi encoding. I'm afraid that the requirement
    of coded Siddam script can be different from that of
    other historical Brahmi-derivative scripts (e.g. Chalukya/
    BoxHeaded, Khotanese, Satavahana, Turkestani), because
    there are some archives by non-native Siddham users
    in Chinese and Japanese.

    According to SEI's liaison report to UTC on 2007,
    Stefan Baums and Andrew Glass are revising their
    preliminary proposal of Brahmi encoding.


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed May 21 2008 - 04:07:54 CDT