[EMAIL PROTECTED] scripsit: > So, the question is this: Should we say that this writing system is > completely Latin (keeping the norm that orthographic writing systems use a > single script) and apply the principle of unification -- across languages > but not across scripts -- to imply that we need to encode new characters, > Latin delta, Latin theta and Latin yeru? Or, do we say that this writing > system is only *mostly* Latin-based, and that it mixes in a few characters > from other scripts?
The Kurdish precedent suggests the latter (Kurdish is Cyrillic but uses Q and W from Latin), but some of us think that was wrongly decided and should be overruled. (IANAL, TINLA.) -- "No, John. I want formats that are actually John Cowan useful, rather than over-featured megaliths that http://www.ccil.org/~cowan address all questions by piling on ridiculous http://www.reutershealth.com internal links in forms which are hideously [EMAIL PROTECTED] over-complex." --Simon St. Laurent on xml-dev
