From: Michael Everson (everson@evertype.com)
Date: Sun May 29 2011 - 19:35:50 CDT
On 30 May 2011, at 01:05, Richard Wordingham wrote:
> They are not encoded. Whether for tact or by ignorance, I do not know. Possibly they might have been omitted as not commercially significant
Because we do not have solid evidence about how Pali extensions are used in Lao.
> - there was a time when Unicode was not intended to ultimately encode every script.
This is not true. The Universal Character Set is intended to be universal.
> According to Gregory Kourilsky, the missing consonants (for Sanskrit as
> well as Pali), along with niggahita, which is encoded, were added by the
> Buddhist Institute in the 1930s.
Sources, please.
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun May 29 2011 - 19:38:55 CDT