From: Shawn Steele (Shawn.Steele@microsoft.com)
Date: Tue May 26 2009 - 16:44:55 CDT
Now we're digressing, but I'm not sure how q & Q in Klingon are much different that i & I when used in English vs. their use in Turkish. If you had Klingon casing algorithms (which recognized that it has no case as I understand it), then presumably the distinction between q & Q would be preserved?
Or are individual languages not allowed to override the Unicode categories? (Does this mean that if isn’t encoded, then there “should” be a LATIN LETTER KLINGON QH to preserve the distinction?)
,
- Shawn ()
-----Original Message-----
From: unicode-bounce@unicode.org [mailto:unicode-bounce@unicode.org] On Behalf Of Michael Everson
Sent: , 26, 2009 13:23
To: unicode Unicode Discussion
Subject: Re: Klingon anti-virus
On 26 May 2009, at 21:09, Edward Cherlin wrote:
Quoting "Michael Everson" <everson@evertype.com>:
>> Klingonists use the Latin alphabet. And they haven't even worked
>> out a decent way to deal with data exchange, since <q> and <Q> are
>> different letters in the Latin alphabet for Klingon. Klingon
>> definitely needs a spelling reform.
> The linguistic community does *not* want us meddling in how their
> transcriptions are encoded. That way lies madness. They do *not*
> want every possible character combination encoded, and they do *not*
> want us defining new casing classes.
Latin orthography for Klingon needs a spelling reform. vuDwIj 'oH.
That is my opinion. It is not functional and it is badly lossy, and
you do not find examples of it on the internet "marked up" to preserve
the distinction between q and Q.
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue May 26 2009 - 16:48:14 CDT