From: Peter Constable (petercon@microsoft.com)
Date: Thu Jul 07 2005 - 12:29:45 CDT
> From: Peter Kirk [mailto:peterkirk@qaya.org]
> >>NO : it means they must behave the same way and that in this case
> >>as Phoenician and Old Hebrew are linguistically sometimes
unseparable
> >>and Old Hebrew is even written written in Phoenician that this is
> >useless.
> >
> >The fact that old Turkish is written in Arabic while recent Turkish
is
> >written in Latin has nothing whatsoever to do with whether Arabic and
> >Latin should be encoded with the same or different characters.
> This is a false analogy...
The only analogy is that to say that "Old Hebrew [language] is written
in [whatever]" implies nothing about the identity of scripts. If you
want a better analogy, Old Tamil was written in Grantha, but that is
neither here nor there in deciding whether Grantha should be encoded
using the same characters as Tamil.
Peter Constable
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jul 07 2005 - 12:30:26 CDT