From: Kenneth Whistler (email@example.com)
Date: Wed May 18 2005 - 12:41:34 CDT
> Please tell me someone, why in the heavens, making destinction between capital
> letters and normal letters in Glagoliza? Who's idea that was?
And in addition to Michael's response, which reflects the facts
about Glagolitic, there is the compatibility requirement.
One of the main reasons Glagolitic was encoded in Unicode was
to ensure mapping to ISO 6861, a preexisting ISO standard,
developed by TC 46. *That* standard has a distinction between
uppercase and lowercase Glagolitic letters.
So if you wish to make rhetorical points about whose silly idea
casing for Glagolitic was, you could pursue TC 46 committee members
from a decade ago. This wasn't some innovation invented this
year by the Unicode Technical Committee.
> I strongly suggest to remove that extra layer of confusion by making Glagolitic
> script without capital letters, which are exactly same glyphs anyway.
As Michael indicated, this is already in the standard.
You do not "remove [an] extra layer of confusion" in a standard
by deleting things after they are already in the standard.
Acting that way *creates* confusion and interoperability
issues for a standard, and would be a road to causing failure
in use of the standard, rather than helping anything.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed May 18 2005 - 12:42:37 CDT