Re: Berber/Tifinagh (was: Swahili & Banthu)

• Previous message: Jungshik Shin: "RE: Tamil 0BB3 and 0BD7"
• In reply to: Alexander Savenkov: "Re[2]: Berber/Tifinagh (was: Swahili & Banthu)"
• Next in thread: Michael Everson: "Re[2]: Berber/Tifinagh (was: Swahili & Banthu)"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
• Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

Alexander Savenkov scripsit:

> I'm not sure I'm not taking your words out of the context, Michael.

You are. Michael is complaining not about transliteration as such,
but about "instant transliteration" by font substitution.

-- 
John Cowan  jcowan@reutershealth.com  www.ccil.org/~cowan  www.reutershealth.com
I must confess that I have very little notion of what [s. 4 of the British
Trade Marks Act, 1938] is intended to convey, and particularly the sentence
of 253 words, as I make them, which constitutes sub-section 1.  I doubt if
the entire statute book could be successfully searched for a sentence of
equal length which is of more fuliginous obscurity. --MacKinnon LJ, 1940

• Next message: Michael Everson: "Re[2]: Berber/Tifinagh (was: Swahili & Banthu)"
• Previous message: Jungshik Shin: "RE: Tamil 0BB3 and 0BD7"
• In reply to: Alexander Savenkov: "Re[2]: Berber/Tifinagh (was: Swahili & Banthu)"
• Next in thread: Michael Everson: "Re[2]: Berber/Tifinagh (was: Swahili & Banthu)"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
• Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Nov 10 2003 - 12:34:33 EST