Re: ASCII and Unicode lifespan

From: Alexander Kh. (
Date: Fri May 20 2005 - 14:43:18 CDT

  • Next message: John H. Jenkins: "Re: ASCII and Unicode lifespan"


    I apologize for ambiguity of my phraze

    > > what letters are
    > > to be considered as meaningful and what letters are pure fantasy.

    that resulted in so much fruitless debate. By saying "letters" I only
    meant "letters", and not "scripts" which are so easy to confuse. In
    fact, I have no objection to having fantasy scripts.

    What I meant is for example, strange "semisoft sign" 048C which looks
    same as Yate 0462. Is that someone's joke?

    Or, for example letter 047C - Omega with titlo: why separate letter if
    titlo is defined separately 0483 (is there a stateless way to encode a
    titlo that spans several letters?). Next letter, however, 047E is indeed
    a separate letter, and it is read as "ot" in text.

    This is all while numeric titlo is missing alltogether: how would you
    write Old Slavonic numerals in Unicode?

    Best regards,

    Alexander Kh.

    Sign-up for Ads Free at

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri May 20 2005 - 14:44:05 CDT