-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1
Hello folks,
I've been wondering a little bit recently about the definition of
"character" vs. "glyph variant" that is applied during decision
whether or not a given proposed character should go into Unicode.
I'm thinking of all those highly academic cases such as the famous Han
signs in medieval Korean Buddhist manuscripts (which we've had quite a
lot of recently). What if it is a character where nobody knows for
sure whether it is a character in its own right or a variant of some
sort, in orthography, style or whatever? There must be some semiotic
concept behind the idea of "character" here. Other examples might
include some aspects of Mayan or Indus script or of Sumerian cuneiform
when used to write Eblaite where we've got lots and lots of text, but
we can't read it properly without confusion, either completely (Indus
script) or in some more or less rare cases.
What is necessary for two signs to constitute different characters in
cases such as these?
Greetings
Philipp mailto:uzsv2k@uni-bonn.de
__________________________
Nuke the gay, unborn, baby whales for Jesus.
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.0.6 (MingW32)
Comment: Freedom of the press is limited to those who own one.
iD8DBQE76UxN3PGzpSk43FoRAlaaAJ4iXNo2AHai8P0a6dctKU3egsZgHACgiYCf
jh2b3FPhTEzjt3WxsySRgYs=
=RFru
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Mon Nov 12 2001 - 11:03:12 EST