From: Mark Davis ☕ (mark@macchiato.com)
Date: Mon Jun 07 2010 - 23:26:43 CDT
For definitions, there are many references. For Unicode characters, the
Standard defines a property in http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr24/ and
http://unicode.org/Public/UNIDATA/Scripts.txt. Here is the current list:
http://unicode.org/cldr/utility/list-unicodeset.jsp?a=\p{sc%3DLatn}
Mark
— Il meglio è l’inimico del bene —
On Mon, Jun 7, 2010 at 20:39, Tulasi <tulasird@gmail.com> wrote:
> Jony -> A B C D E F G H I K L M N O P Q R S T V X Y Z
> ?
>
> You mean ALL CAPS again like UNICODE :)
>
> Van -> Do you mean historically or pragmatically?
>
> Actually something that will include all letters/symbols now
> considered Latin-script
>
> Otto Stolz -> Not exactly a definition: What the Unicode standard says
> on this issue, is here:
>
> There might be someone who already defined Latin script!
> Europeans have produced lot of scholars.
>
> Tulasi
>
>
> From: Jonathan Rosenne <jr@qsm.co.il>
> Date: Mon, 7 Jun 2010 22:05:11 +0300
> Subject: RE: Latin Script
> To: unicode@unicode.org
>
> How about
>
> A B C D E F G H I K L M N O P Q R S T V X Y Z
>
> ?
>
> There are also some extensions, see
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_alphabet for general background.
>
> Jony
>
> > -----Original Message-----
> > From: unicode-bounce@unicode.org [mailto:unicode-bounce@unicode.org] On
> > Behalf Of Tulasi
> > Sent: Sunday, June 06, 2010 11:27 AM
> > To: unicode@unicode.org
> > Subject: Latin Script
> >
> > How do you define Latin Script?
>
>
> From: vanisaac@boil.afraid.org
> Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2010 12:18:29 -0700
> Subject: Re: Latin Script
> To: tulasird@gmail.com, unicode@unicode.org
>
> From: Tulasi (tulasird@gmail.com)
> > How do you define Latin Script?
>
> Do you mean historically or pragmatically? Historically, it is an
> adaptation of the Ionian Greek (or is it Doric?), via Etruscan, for
> the purpose of writing Latin, and later extended by the addition of
> alternate letterforms (J, W, Þ, and the lower case) and diacritics to
> the use of western European languages and globally to indigenous
> languages in primary contact with western European languages that use
> the Latin alphabet.
>
> Pragmatically, it is the collection of characters that are used in
> languages in conjunction with the primary collection of Roman derived
> letterforms as an alphabetic script. This means that the syllabic
> Fraser Lisu is not Latin script. Neither is Cyrillic, even though it
> has imported Dze and Je - the basic Latin alphabet does not constitute
> the core of Cyrillic usage.
>
> Typographic tradition also plays a part - Greek would probably be a
> lot more ambiguous if it hadn't developed typographically among
> Byzantine scribes. Latin typography developed primarily among
> post-Roman and Carolignian scribal traditions, with offshoot
> blackletter and Italic scribal traditions that have secondary status
> in the modern script. Greek and Cyrillic don't share this history, and
> as such, even though they are structurally similar, they have evolved
> along different lines and constitute distinct scripts. The fact that
> you don't find languages that mix the two up is evidence of these
> schizms. The border languages choose one or the other, or they have
> two different orthographies that use each script independently of the
> other.
>
> Van
>
>
> From: Otto Stolz <Otto.Stolz@uni-konstanz.de>
> Date: Mon, 07 Jun 2010 21:50:23 +0200
> Subject: Re: Latin Script
> To: Tulasi <tulasird@gmail.com>
> Cc: unicode@unicode.org
>
> Am 2010-06-06 10:26, schrieb Tulasi:
> > How do you define Latin Script?
>
> Not exactly a definition: What the Unicode standard
> says on this issue, is here:
> 7.1 Latin
> <http://www.unicode.org/versions/Unicode5.2.0/ch07.pdf#G4321>
>
> And a few words, e. g. “well-known”, are also here:
> 6.1 Writing Systems
> <http://www.unicode.org/versions/Unicode5.2.0/ch06.pdf#G7382>
>
>
> Best wishes,
> Otto Stolz
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jun 07 2010 - 23:30:41 CDT