Re: Bliss?

From: Doug Ewell <>
Date: Tue, 14 Oct 2014 09:06:50 -0700

Markus Scherer <markus dot icu at gmail dot com> wrote:

> As Michael said, I don't have information. But I found this which
> might help:

Statements in the linked article such as the following (not written by
Markus) always trouble me:

"The proposed encoding does not use the lexical encoding model used in
the existing ISO-IR/169 registered character set, but instead applies
the Unicode and ISO character-glyph model to the Bliss-character model
already adopted by BCI, since this would significantly reduce the number
of needed characters."

since my understanding has always been that the reasons behind the
character-glyph model go much deeper than reducing the number of encoded

Doug Ewell | Thornton, CO, USA |
Unicode mailing list
Received on Tue Oct 14 2014 - 11:09:01 CDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Tue Oct 14 2014 - 11:09:09 CDT