> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Michael Everson
> >Okay, perhaps we're getting somewhere and beginning to understand > >each other. What you are saying, in effect, is that there is already > >a de facto unification of Phoenician and Hebrew encoding, employed > >by a significant user group. > > But there is no de facto unification. This script has been on the > books for ages. Michael, I don't oppose your conclusion (however all the chips fall, I would have expected Phoenician and other early semitic writing to be encoded distinctly from Modern Hebrew characters), but you are not slowing down to hear what people are saying here. John did not say that there is a de facto unification of the scripts qua scripts. He acknowledged that *in current practice of a significant user group* there is a de facto unification of encoding. That isn't an opinion we can debate, that is an undisputed fact: it *is* what a significant group of users are doing with their data, as some of the representatives of that group have told us (and there's no reason to believe they're lying). Peter Constable
