Hello, 2004-05-12T03:08:59+03:00 Eric Muller <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> According to <www.eki.ee>, there is a currently an effort to convert the > writing of Tatar from Cyrillic to Latin. > 1. Does somebody have more information about that effort? Perhaps it's their own effort. > Eki lists four characters as needed but missing in Unicode (see > <http://www.eki.ee/letter/chardata.cgi?lang=tt+Tatar&script=latin>). > 2. The case pair for barred o is encoded (U+019F and U+0275), and it > seems that their confusion comes from less-than-perfect but annotated > name for U+019F, and from the usage remark "African". Can we > authoritatively tell them that those two characters are the ones they > want? Can we add a "Tatar" usage remark to both? Is there a need for this? You don't want to tell everyone on the net about his or her wrong assumptions. There's one sentence in the page you mentioned that gives a good description of this resource: "The conversion from Cyrillic to Latin script is planned within years 2001-2011." This is false. > 3. The case pair n with descender is definitely not encoded, and from my > memory of the discussion of ghe with descender, we would want to encode > them as separate characters (rather than with combining descenders on > "n"). Is anybody working on that proposal? There's no Latin Tatar script. It's the law. Full stop. It's the Institute of Estonian language. I hope they know more about Estonian than about other languages and Unicode. > PS: sorry for the double post to unicode and unicore. However, given the > current state of [EMAIL PROTECTED], this seems the best course of action. What's up with [EMAIL PROTECTED] -- Alexander Savenkov http://www.xmlhack.ru/ [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://www.xmlhack.ru/authors/croll/
