> Hmmm, I'm not sure it's flawed. Sure, recognizability makes it
> non-equivalent to the Phoenician-Hebrew case, but it still
demonstrates
> that
> a subset-superset relationship between purported scripts A and B does
not
> make them distinct.
Whatever the logic in the examples, I certainly agree
Philippe Verdy wrote:
>> A problem, however, is that many such forms are found in unstable
>> orthographies, and are difficult to document adequately for inclusion
>> in proposals.
>
> This last argument should not be a limitation to encode them. After
> all they are used for living languages in
Peter Constable scripsit:
> What are the directional properties of Pheonician? Is it RTL only, or
> was it ever written with a different directionality?
It's RTL only, except to the extent that you consider Archaic Greek a
script variant of Phoenician. :-)
--
John Cowan [EMAIL PROTECTED] www
Peter Constable scripsit:
> 2) the characters in question are structurally / behaviourally very
> similar to square Hebrew characters, but not to the characters of other
> scripts
Not just very similar: structurally, behaviorally, and even phonemically
identical.
> Item 1, I think we'd agree, is
Peter Constable wrote:
> the Old Latin doesn't have the accents, but if you
> used the 23
> uni-cameral characters for Vietnamese text, then surely a Vietnamese
> speaker would recognize it as caseless Vietnamese with the accents
> stripped off.
>
>...
> So, while Michael's argument was flawed in
What are the directional properties of Pheonician? Is it RTL only, or
was it ever written with a different directionality?
Peter Constable
"John Hudson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>
> > While the fact that it's called Phoenician script doesn't prove anything
> > about its origin, it might be considered indicative of the path through
> > which the script was borrowed.
> Indeed. This is the point I made ea
"Doug Ewell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> C J Fynn wrote:
> > "Philippe Verdy" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> >> Certainly, but what is the distinction between downloading/
> >> distributing a font or downloading/ditributing a XML file containing
> >> the PUA conventions?
> > One file not two
"Peter Kirk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> On 02/05/2004 11:57, Deborah W. Anderson wrote:
> >As one coming from the world of ancient Indo-European (IE) and as editor of
a journal on IE out of UCLA, I am in support of the Phoenician proposal.
> Thank you, Deborah. You have given what is to me a
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On
> Behalf Of Francois Yergeau
> Suppose I were to float a proposal to encode Old Latin, consisting of
the
> original 23-letter unicameral alphabet. Try this on for size:
>
> > It is false to suggest that
> > fully-[accented, cased Vietnamese
> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]
On
> Behalf Of John Hudson
> > No Georgian can read Nuskhuri without a key. I maintain that no
Hebrew
> > reader can read Phoenician without a key. I maintain that it is
> > completely unacceptable to represent Yiddish text in a Phoenician
font
Raymond Mercier wrote,
> BabelPad is great, but it chokes in converting all the UTF8 in unihan.txt to
> NCR at one
> go. I wrote a dedicated program to do that.
Options - Advanced Options - (Edit Options) -
Make sure the box for "Enable Undo/Redo" is not checked.
Yes, when the commas in UNIHAN.
At 11:53 +1000 2004-05-01, Nick Nicholas wrote:
Coptic could have stayed unified with Greek,
Certainly not!
and myself I'm still not convinced the distinction between Greek and
Coptic in bilingual editions is not truly just a font issue.
Plain-text searching of Crum's dictionary, for instance, is
At 12:13 -0700 2004-05-03, John Hudson wrote:
Michael Everson wrote:
No Georgian can read Nuskhuri without a key. I maintain that no
Hebrew reader can read Phoenician without a key. I maintain that it
is completely unacceptable to represent Yiddish text in a
Phoenician font and have anyone recog
> A possible question to ask which is blatantly leading would be:
>
> Would you have any objections if your bibliographic database
> application suddenly began displaying all of your Hebrew
> book titles using the palaeo-Hebrew script rather than
> the modern He
At 11:42 -0700 2004-05-03, John Hudson wrote:
Michael Everson wrote:
>> Hebrew has the same 22 characters, with the same character properties.
And a baroque set of additional marks and signs, none of which
apply to any of the Phoenician letterforms, EVER, in the history of
typography, reading, a
At 20:37 -0800 2004-05-03, D. Starner wrote:
Again, change Hebrew to Latin and palaeo-Hebrew to Fraktur and see
how many objections you get.
I should think far fewer; the legibility quotient is much different.
I have said before:
Set a German or Danish or Icelandic wedding invitation in Fraktur. No
At 00:19 -0400 2004-05-04, Ernest Cline wrote:
It would seem to me that it would be appropriate that this new
character's canonical combining class should either be the same as
that of QAMATS which is 18
That is correct. We overlooked the properties line in the proposal,
the template for which w
At 03:01 + 2004-05-04, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
John Cowan wrote,
> (And to the last, I'd be tempted to add: If so, what on Earth could those
> objections be?)
Expense. Complication. Delays while the encoding gets into the Standard
and thence into popular operating systems, with all the
At 23:08 -0400 2004-05-03, John Cowan wrote:
[EMAIL PROTECTED] scripsit:
Those objections are quite generic and could be made just as well
for N'ko, Ol Cemet', Egyptian Hieroglyphics, &c.
But there is no clear-cut alternative for any of those. N'ko encoding
is font-kludge, Unicode, or nothing.
03/05/2004 05:19, Michael Everson wrote:
Suetterlin.
Oh shut UP about Sütterlin already. I don't know where you guys come
up with this stuff. Sütterlin is a kind of stylized handwriting based on
Fraktur letterforms and ductus. It is hard to read. It is not hard to
learn, ...
Since when is thi
At 20:22 -0700 2004-05-03, Mark Davis wrote:
all, it *is* unifying as it says "Proto-Sinaitic/Proto-Canaanite,
No, Proto-Sinaitic is out, actually, though it's still in the Summary
Form by accident.
Punic, Neo-Punic, Phoenician proper, Late Phoenician cursive,
Phoenician papyrus, Siloam Hebrew,
At this time there are about 160 different character properties defined
in the UCD. In practice most applications probably only use a limited set
of properties to work with. Nevertheless applications should be able to
lookup all the properties of a code point. Compiling-in lookup tables for
all def
Dean Snyder a écrit :
Patrick Andries wrote at 8:55 AM on Monday, May 3, 2004:
I got this answer from a forum dedicated to Ancient Hebrew :
« Very few people can read let alone recognize the paleo Hebrew font.
Most modern Hebrew readers are not even aware that Hebrew was once
written in the pa
> [Original Message]
> From: Michael Everson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> A new contribution.
>
> http://www.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/n2755.pdf
> N2755
> Proposal to add QAMATS QATAN to the BMP of the UCS
> Michael Everson & Mark Shoulson
Given the description in the proposal which indicates that
th
From: "Michael Everson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> A new contribution.
> http://www.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/n2755.pdf
> N2755
> Proposal to add QAMATS QATAN to the BMP of the UCS
> Michael Everson & Mark Shoulson
I note that your document uses inconsistently two different code points: it
proposes th
From: "Dean Snyder" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Patrick Andries wrote at 8:55 AM on Monday, May 3, 2004:
>
> >I got this answer from a forum dedicated to Ancient Hebrew :
> >
> >« Very few people can read let alone recognize the paleo Hebrew font.
> >Most modern Hebrew readers are not even aware that Heb
[Earlier posting lost, it seems.]
James Kass writes:
> The lack of support for supplementary characters expressed in UTF-8
> in the Internet Explorer is a bug. As Philippe Verdy mentions, the
> Mozilla browser does not have this same bug. Also it should be
> noted that the Opera browser handles
From: "John Hudson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> Philippe Verdy wrote:
>
> > I thought about missing African letters like barred-R, barred-W, etc... with
> > combining overlay "diacritics" (whose usage has been strongly discouraged
within
> > Unicode).
> >
> > May be a font could handle theses combination
On Sun, 2 May 2004 12:14:29 -0700, "Doug Ewell" wrote:
>
> wrote:
>
> > The BabelPad editor can easily convert between UTF-8 and NCRs...
>
> As can SC UniPad.
For $199 (unless you're only interested in editing files up to 1,000 characters
in length).
Andrew
Mark Davis wrote:
The question for me is whether the scholarly representations of the Phoenician
would vary enough that in order to represent the palÃo-Hebrew (or the other
language/period variants), one would need to have font difference anyway. If so,
then it doesn't buy much to encode separately
Michael Everson wrote:
If you people, after all of this discussion, can think that it is
possible to print a newspaper article in Hebrew language or Yiddish in
Phoenician letters, then all I can say is that understanding of the
fundamentals of script identity is at an all-time low. I'm really
s
Michael Everson wrote:
>> Hebrew has the same 22 characters, with the same character properties.
And a baroque set of additional marks and signs, none of which apply to
any of the Phoenician letterforms, EVER, in the history of typography,
reading, and literature.
And a baroque set of additional
Michael Everson wrote:
This is no different from Welsh:
A B C CH D DD E F FF G NG
All of those are considered "letters" in the Welsh alphabet. They are
all "significant". But that doesn't mean that "ch" and "dd" get encoded
as single entities. They write "c" + "h" and "d" + "d".
In Yoruba, y
Michael Everson wrote:
No Georgian can read Nuskhuri without a key. I maintain that no Hebrew
reader can read Phoenician without a key. I maintain that it is
completely unacceptable to represent Yiddish text in a Phoenician font
and have anyone recognize it at all.
But no one is going to do that
Michael Everson wrote:
A new contribution.
http://www.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/n2755.pdf
N2755
Proposal to add QAMATS QATAN to the BMP of the UCS
Michael Everson & Mark Shoulson
Nice.
> 8a. Can any of the proposed characters be considered a presentation
> form of an existing character or charact
101 - 136 of 136 matches
Mail list logo
