Ar 06:29 -0800 2000-04-24, scr�obh Elliotte Rusty Harold:
>Is the following statement accurate?
>
>Probably less than one person in a thousand today speaks a language that
>cannot be reasonably represented in Unicode.
>
>Can anyone be more accurate than that? If the number is higher than 1 in
>a 1000, what scripts still need to be encoded to get the ratio below 1
>in a 1000? If it's already much less than 1 in a 1000, how low is it
>approximately? 1 in 10,000? 100,000? 1,000,000?
As custodian (or whatever) of the minority scripts and historical scripts
as yet unencoded in the UCS, I have grave misgivings about the utility of
such questions and the blurbs one imagines will result. Perhaps that is not
Elliotte Rusty Harold's intention, I don't know.
Our work is not finished. Telling the world that it is finished just makes
the work of encoding the economically less-viable scripts more difficult.
Michael Everson ** Everson Gunn Teoranta ** http://www.egt.ie
15 Port Chaeimhghein �ochtarach; Baile �tha Cliath 2; �ire/Ireland
Vox +353 1 478 2597 ** Fax +353 1 478 2597 ** Mob +353 86 807 9169
27 P�irc an Fh�ithlinn; Baile an Bh�thair; Co. �tha Cliath; �ire
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:02 EDT