Philippe Verdy wrote:Compare tengwar; much the same situation. I realize tengwar isn't yet encoded, but I think there's no question of how it should be encoded, if it is.
You seem to forget that Tifinagh is not a unified script, but a set of
separate
scripts where the same glyphs are used with distinct semantic functions.
I think Philippe is running off the rails here.
Tifinagh is a script. It comes in a number of local varieties, adapted to different languages and with local variations in glyph preferences. It will be encoded as a *single* script in Unicode, since encoding all the local orthographic varieties as distinct scripts would really not be a service to anyone who wants this script encoded for enabling IT processing of Berber textual data.
All of Unicode is just a cypher to strings of [0123456789ABCDEF], really. Or to strings from [01], come to that.when they already have the merit of covering the whole abstract
character set covered by all scripts in the Tifinagh family?
You could say the same about any script whatsoever, as I
suspect that *every* script in Unicode has been transliterated
into the Latin script at one point or another. Why not just
map them *all* to Latin and save the messy task of having to
deal with data represented in its own script? (<== That was
a rhetorical question, in case it wasn't obvious to all readers.)
~mark
