Re: Latin digraph characters (was: Re: Klingon silliness)

From: Michael Everson (everson@egt.ie)
Date: Tue Feb 27 2001 - 13:59:30 EST

Next message: Richard Cook: "Re: CJKV ideographic, was Re: Perception that Unicode is 16-bit (was: Re: Surrogate space i"
Previous message: John Cowan: "Re: Latin digraph characters (was: Re: Klingon silliness)"
Maybe in reply to: DougEwell2@cs.com: "Latin digraph characters (was: Re: Klingon silliness)"
Next in thread: John Cowan: "Re: Latin digraph characters (was: Re: Klingon silliness)"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

At 08:33 -0800 2001-02-27, DougEwell2@cs.com wrote:

>This has always puzzled me, because Cyrillic includes lots of other
>characters that transliterate to two or more Latin letters. CH, SH, SHCH,
>and ZH leap to mind; there may be more. What was the thought process behind
>providing these compatibility characters only for the Serbo-Croatian
>additions to Cyrillic, but not for the other Cyrillic characters?

It was politically motivated, to satisfy a voting NB.

-- 
Michael Everson  **  Everson Gunn Teoranta  **   http://www.egt.ie
15 Port Chaeimhghein Íochtarach; Baile Átha Cliath 2; Éire/Ireland
Mob +353 86 807 9169 ** Fax +353 1 478 2597 ** Vox +353 1 478 2597
27 Páirc an Fhéithlinn;  Baile an Bhóthair;  Co. Átha Cliath; Éire

Next message: Richard Cook: "Re: CJKV ideographic, was Re: Perception that Unicode is 16-bit (was: Re: Surrogate space i"
Previous message: John Cowan: "Re: Latin digraph characters (was: Re: Klingon silliness)"
Maybe in reply to: DougEwell2@cs.com: "Latin digraph characters (was: Re: Klingon silliness)"
Next in thread: John Cowan: "Re: Latin digraph characters (was: Re: Klingon silliness)"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:19 EDT