On 11/15/2002 12:22:15 PM John Cowan wrote: >> So, the question is this: Should we say that this writing system is >> completely Latin (keeping the norm that orthographic writing systems use a >> single script) and apply the principle of unification -- across languages >> but not across scripts -- to imply that we need to encode new characters, >> Latin delta, Latin theta and Latin yeru? Or, do we say that this writing >> system is only *mostly* Latin-based, and that it mixes in a few characters >> from other scripts? > >The Kurdish precedent suggests the latter (Kurdish is Cyrillic but uses Q and >W from Latin), but some of us think that was wrongly decided and should be >overruled. (IANAL, TINLA.)
I had thought of that case, and knew that some thought the Q and W should be added to Cyrillic, which was one more reason why I wondered what people might think in this case. - Peter --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter Constable Non-Roman Script Initiative, SIL International 7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd., Dallas, TX 75236, USA Tel: +1 972 708 7485 E-mail: <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
