Re: Level of Unicode support required for various languages

From: Simon Montagu (smontagu@smontagu.org)
Date: Thu Oct 25 2007 - 02:17:54 CDT

  • Next message: Otto Stolz: "Re: Cost of no OCR for extended Latin"

    Michael Everson wrote:
    > At 23:14 +0100 2007-10-24, Andrew West wrote:
    >
    >> Indeed. Even English requires combining marks if you want to support
    >> Old English other than normalised Early West Saxon, e.g. ¦¯©‚el or
    >> o?e©‚el (oe ligature with combining macron or oe with combining double
    >> macron). And I guess that there are a few of us on this list who would
    >> say that fully supporting OE is absolutely required for English as a
    >> whole.
    >
    > Of course it is. I learnt OE in secondary school. Surely that is
    > "ordinary" enough.

    What does that prove? I learned Classical Greek in secondary school.
    Does that mean that fully supporting polytonic Greek is absolutely
    required for English as a whole?

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Oct 25 2007 - 02:20:51 CDT