From: Peter_Constable@sil.org
Date: Fri Nov 15 2002 - 19:18:31 EST
On 11/15/2002 12:22:15 PM John Cowan wrote:
>> So, the question is this: Should we say that this writing system is
>> completely Latin (keeping the norm that orthographic writing systems use
a
>> single script) and apply the principle of unification -- across
languages
>> but not across scripts -- to imply that we need to encode new
characters,
>> Latin delta, Latin theta and Latin yeru? Or, do we say that this writing
>> system is only *mostly* Latin-based, and that it mixes in a few
characters
>> from other scripts?
>
>The Kurdish precedent suggests the latter (Kurdish is Cyrillic but uses Q
and
>W from Latin), but some of us think that was wrongly decided and should be
>overruled. (IANAL, TINLA.)
I had thought of that case, and knew that some thought the Q and W should
be added to Cyrillic, which was one more reason why I wondered what people
might think in this case.
- Peter
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Constable
Non-Roman Script Initiative, SIL International
7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd., Dallas, TX 75236, USA
Tel: +1 972 708 7485
E-mail: <peter_constable@sil.org>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 15 2002 - 20:04:50 EST