Re: Biblical Hebrew

From: John Hudson (tiro@tiro.com)
Date: Fri Jun 27 2003 - 18:18:15 EDT

  • Next message: Kenneth Whistler: "Re: Biblical Hebrew"

    At 01:45 PM 6/27/2003, Philippe Verdy wrote:

    >I understand the frustration:

    Similar to the frustration of having private, off-list messages replied to
    in public.

    > if Unicode had not attempted to define
    >combining classes, which were not necessary to Unicode, all
    >existing combining characters would have been given a CC=0
    >(or all the same 220 or 230 value). This would have left the
    >compatibility with legacy encodings and with Modern Hebrew,
    >without breaking Traditional Hebrew.

    Combining classes are useful and normalisation is a good thing that reduces
    the number of possible encodings of equivalent character sequences. This is
    very important and valuable during search and sort operations, and greatly
    reduces processing time.

    I have nothing at all against either normalisation or combining classes.

    John Hudson

    Tiro Typeworks www.tiro.com
    Vancouver, BC tiro@tiro.com

    If you browse in the shelves that, in American bookstores,
    are labeled New Age, you can find there even Saint Augustine,
    who, as far as I know, was not a fascist. But combining Saint
    Augustine and Stonehenge -- that is a symptom of Ur-Fascism.
                                                                 - Umberto Eco



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jun 27 2003 - 18:58:07 EDT