Re: Basic Latin

From: Jukka K. Korpela <>
Date: Thu, 03 Jan 2013 01:26:02 +0200

2013-01-03 0:22, Markus Scherer wrote:

> On Wed, Jan 2, 2013 at 1:25 PM, Jukka K. Korpela <
> <>> wrote:
> Then again, Latin is no different from Cyrillic, Greek, or Arabic,
> for example, in this respect. In an apparent attempt to save space,
> the script names are also links to basic blocks of characters for
> the scripts. This would not be my cup of tea, but I can well
> understand the reasoning behind this. Using “Basic Latin” etc. as
> lower-level items would have been more logical here, but not
> necessarily more practical.
> The page has been modified to add an alias for Basic Latin (ASCII) under
> the Latin heading.

I can see that, but I don’t think it’s an improvement. It puts the Latin
script in a special status. And it makes both “Latin” and “Basic Latin
(ASCII)” links to the same page, violating fundamental accessibility
principles: duplicate links should be avoided, and when they can’t be
avoided, they should have exactly the same link texts.

Received on Wed Jan 02 2013 - 17:29:58 CST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Wed Jan 02 2013 - 17:30:00 CST