Stefan asked: > > In general, no. If there is a fair chance that something will become > > part of Unicode, we usually don't register it. There are exceptions, > > like Tengwar and Cirth. > > Is there any chance that Tengwar and Cirth might become parts of the UCS?
Yes. I consider them perfectly valid instances of scripts, in reasonably wide use for a number of purposes, and well-enoughed defined that the encoding can be decided. And there are enough members of the UTC who think they are valid that they can still be considered clearly on the table (though not actively under investigation for any imminent encoding). > I > know that they have been proposed for inclusion, but all proposed characters > don't have to be included in the standard... Would it even be *legal* to > include those characters (referring to U+00A9 COPYRIGHT SIGN)? Why not? Elvish poetry is published in academic publications using Tengwar, without anybody paying some licensing fee to somebody for use of the characters. I see nothing preventing standardization of the scripts -- and many of the users of the scripts would be in favor of such an action. > > BTW, has *any* script, invented for *any* kind of fiction (or similar), ever > been fully approved and included in the UCS? Shavian has been approved by the UTC for inclusion in Unicode, and is under ballot as an amendment for 10646 currently. It wasn't exactly invented *for* fiction per se, but rather as a failed orthographic reform, but it was used, of course, to publish Androcles and the Lion. > And, has any such script ever > been rejected? The Klingon *script* has been rejected, since it is ill-defined, and is not actually used by Klingon language fans to represent Klingon. (Klingon is normally represented in a Latin-script-based orthography.) --Ken
