From: "James Kass" <jameskass@worldnet.att.net>
> The changes to the script are relevant to the linear Tamil issue
> because the changes to the script include the notion that Tamil
> is to be written linearly. The changes (modernizations) to some
> of the glyphs are not relevant to the linear Tamil issue since
> one will not make the other any easier or harder.
James, you are wrong. Linear Tamil has nothing at all to do with how Tamil
is written. It is a scheme proposed due to a belief that the rendering
system required by Unicode is too complex. The end desired result is text
that looks identical to what is in Unicode now -- but the backend store or
"logical" ordering will have to be changed.
> A script's rules are defined by the users of the script. It is not
> up to a committee to decide how someone else's language is written.
> Unicode codifies existing script rules. If those rules are changed
> by the users, Unicode's gotta roll with the punches.
Um, tell that to people in Cambodia. But be sure to duck when you say it?
> I'm lost.
Yes. :-)
> Unicode's public e-mail list is not an appropriate forum for
> reforming Tamil (or any other) script. It is appropriate to
> discuss how reforms in general or for a specific script will
> impact the standard. It should be appropriate for anyone
> contemplating script reform to ask questions here about
> the standard in order to help minimize that impact.
He is not asking questions and he does understand the issues -- he is just
looking to see Unicode changed in anticipation of a script reform that no
one else has announced or attempted because of an opinion that this "Linear
Unicode" will make the reform easier.
> My impression is that this is what Sinnathurai Srivas has tried
> to do.
I think you may need to spend a bit more time [offlist] so you can have a
full understanding of intentions and desires here.
After dealing with this particular issue for years in forums where it is
off-topic with someone who is insistent that these changes would be needed
to support machines that cannot handle the current encoding, I really do not
want to head on to a new multi-year discussion here on the Unicode list,
where it is if anything even more off-topic.
MichKa
Michael Kaplan
Trigeminal Software, Inc. -- http://www.trigeminal.com/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Fri Jul 26 2002 - 09:21:11 EDT