Re: Glagolitic in Unicode 4.1

From: Hans Aberg (
Date: Tue May 31 2005 - 18:02:06 CDT

  • Next message: Doug Ewell: "Re: Glagolitic in Unicode 4.1"

    At 21:14 +0200 2005/05/31, ڕ wrote:
    >... why the heck
    >was ``fi'' or ``ffi'' encoded when these two can be expressed with their
    >corresponding atoms, ...

    One other way to view this (than backwards
    compatibility with existing character sets), is
    that the Unicode abstract character set contains
    more than one type of abstract characters. With
    modern computing techniques, the most important
    type to add is the semantic character, which
    provides proper atomic linguistic semantic units.
    The characters above, are glyphs, used to
    simplify rendering.

    One can mix different types of abstract
    characters fairly freely, if one just add
    property a field, enabling one to separate them.

       Hans Aberg

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue May 31 2005 - 18:03:56 CDT