Re: Klingon

From: Michael Everson (everson@evertype.com)
Date: Thu Jan 15 2004 - 07:15:06 EST

Next message: Michael Everson: "OT, utterly OT"

Previous message: Michael Everson: "Re: Cuneiform - Dynamic vs. Static"
In reply to: Chris Jacobs: "Klingon"
Next in thread: Chris Jacobs: "Re: Klingon"
Reply: Chris Jacobs: "Re: Klingon"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

At 11:15 +0100 2004-01-15, Chris Jacobs wrote:

> > I had a problem with this too, for a while (previous discussion on this
>> list helped clear it up). Klingon letters had been placed in the PUA by
>> the CSUR (ConsScript Unicode Registry, an unofficial allocation of PUA
>> space to constructed alphabets),
>
>Really?
>
>And did the Klingon Language Institute endorse that?

Yes. See http://www.evertype.com/standards/csur/klingon.html
The original encoding was made for some Linux implementation in 1995
or 1996 I suppose.

-- 
Michael Everson * * Everson Typography *  * http://www.evertype.com

Next message: Michael Everson: "OT, utterly OT"
Previous message: Michael Everson: "Re: Cuneiform - Dynamic vs. Static"
In reply to: Chris Jacobs: "Klingon"
Next in thread: Chris Jacobs: "Re: Klingon"
Reply: Chris Jacobs: "Re: Klingon"
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 : Thu Jan 15 2004 - 07:53:53 EST