I see some differences
- For Georgian, your new file contains only:
Georgian (Mkhedruli);Geor;240;géorgien (mkhédrouli);Georgian;2004-05-18
But the previous version also contained in one of the online tables:
Georgian (Asomtavruli);Geoa;242;géorgien (assomtavrouli);Georgian;2004-01-05
- Where is this line?:
Syloti Nagri;Sylo;316;sylotî nâgrî;;2004-09-01
Limbu has been adjusted to a more appropriate numeric code within South-Asian
scripts (401 to 336).
I also think that the removal of duplicate rows for English or French name
aliases was a good decision (after all the aliases are already listed between
parentheses). I also think that slpitting the line for the start end end codes
of private scripts was a good idea.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Michael Everson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
To: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Sent: Wednesday, May 19, 2004 10:40 PM
Subject: ISO 15924 draft fixes
> The Registrar wishes to thank everyone who has taken an interest in
> the ISO 15924 data pages, and regrets the imperfections which are
> contained there. I am not sure how we will manage the generation of
> the pages, but it is clear that the base should be the plain-text
> document.
>
> I have made changes to the plain-text document and placed it, a draft
> Changes page, and the original plain-text document available at
> http://www.unicode.org/iso15924/iso15924-fixes.zip
>
> I would appreciate it if interested persons could look this over and
> inform me if they find any further discrepancies between the two
> which are worth troubling about. Then we will proceed to generate the
> other files.
>
> I deleted some duplicate lines: Ethiopic was on two lines, under
> Ethiopic and under Ge'ez. It seemed inappropriate to burden the
> tables with such duplication.
>
> I added Coptic unilaterally.
> --
> Michael Everson * * Everson Typography * * http://www.evertype.com
>
