RE: Searching data: map countries to scripts

Manuel Strehl <boldewyn at gmail dot com> wrote:

> It's quite interesting for me to learn, that data here is such
> fragmented.

If the data is fragmented, it's because the concept is somewhat
fragmented. As others have pointed out, while mapping scripts to
languages may be comparatively straightforward, mapping languages to
regions is a lot like nailing jelly to a tree.

> @Doug Ewell: Yes, I wondered, why that was added to Unicode, when I
> read about Shavian first (in the context of Unicode codepoints).

To clarify, my point was not that Deseret and Shavian should not have
been added to Unicode, but that charts showing Deseret and Shavian as
scripts "used" or "historically used" to write English, in the sense
that (say) Arabic was historically used to write Turkish, may be easily
misinterpreted.

--
Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA
http://www.ewellic.org | @DougEwell ­