Re: Devanagari question

From: Michael \(michka\) Kaplan (
Date: Tue Nov 14 2000 - 12:47:37 EST

Although I agree in principle, I find the entire area of Indic scripts (part
of the original topic before the thread drift! <g>) has MANY examples where
the already-encoded does not meet the full needs of either the scripts or
the languages that use them.

There is still lots of room for improvement, and the most important benefit
of Unicode is that they are indeed wanting to improve. :-)


a new book on internationalization in VB at

----- Original Message -----
From: "D.V. Henkel-Wallace" <>
To: "Unicode List" <>
Cc: "Unicode List" <>
Sent: Tuesday, November 14, 2000 8:22 AM
Subject: OT: Devanagari question

> At 06:30 2000-11-14 -0800, Marco Cimarosti wrote:
> >But my point was: not even Mr. Ethnologue himself knows exactly *which*
> >combinations are meaningful, in all orthographic system. And, clearly, no
> >one can figure out which combinations may become meaningful in the
> >-- e.g. when a previously unwritten language gets its orthography, or
> >the spelling of an already written language gets changed.
> Sadly, it seems unlikely that any furture change or adoption of
> will use characters not already supported by the then major computer
> systems. In fact the trend seems to be the other way, viz Spain's
> of its collation rules.
> For a minority language (which all remaining unwritten languages are) the
> pressure will be strong to use existing combinations (since they won't
> constitute a large enough community for people to write special rendering
> support).

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:15 EDT