Re: Biblical Hebrew (Was: Major Defect in Combining Classes of Tibetan Vowels)

From: Peter_Constable@sil.org
Date: Fri Jun 27 2003 - 13:41:40 EDT

  • Next message: Peter_Constable@sil.org: "Re: [cowan: Re: Biblical Hebrew (Was: Major Defect in Combining Classes of Tibetan Vowels)]"

    John Cowan wrote on 06/27/2003 08:24:35 AM:

    > The IETF has an explicit contract with Unicode: "We'
    > ll use your normalization algorithm if you promise NEVER, NEVER to
    change
    > the normalization status of a single character." Unicode has already
    > broken that promise four times, so its credibility is shaky.

    Yeah, but what I don't get is that IETF doesn't set anything in stone
    until there are working implementations, but Unicode's canonical combining
    classes have to be set in stone for IETF's benefit before there are
    working implementations. I just have a hard time understanding that.

    > So far I have not heard any compelling objections to CGJ except that
    > invisible characters are fuggly.

    I just sent a message discussing this.

    - Peter

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Peter Constable

    Non-Roman Script Initiative, SIL International
    7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd., Dallas, TX 75236, USA
    Tel: +1 972 708 7485



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jun 27 2003 - 14:13:52 EDT