|
In any campaign there are
always setbacks but you hope not to be losing winnable battles before they even
start. This analogy comes to mind in reflecting on a really nice
Yoruba online dictionary, Edeyede, that uses a very un-Unicode font.
See http://www.yoruba.gasou.edu
The project came to my attention in
late December 2002 but was apparently well enough committed already to designing
its own font. My suggestion to consider Unicode didn't change anything.
The result is something that you need to download a special font for and that is
incompatible with documents in Unicode (so that, for instance, a
Yoruba word in a Unicode document couldn't be copied & pasted into the
search window). There is some more discussion on this at http://www.quicktopic.com/15/H/KKgbRqJUAR8 .
Using Yoruba on computers & the
internet presents some issues, not least of which is that one key aspect of the
style of diacritics (mark under certain letters) is an option that has 2
different solutions in Unicode (one is a dot under, for which precomposeds
exist) and the other of which is the small vertical line under. In
addition the use of tone marks is advisable, raising the question as to whether
to use precomposed characters where available (accent marks over simple vowels
are available as precomposeds, but this is not the case with dot-under
vowels). Basically there are some issues, 1 specific to the language's
orthography and the others relating to how Unicode provides for the orthography,
that present some complexity to a project such as this dictionary
one.
Looking for reasons for this
"defeat," I think it's necessary to look at the larger issues than just the
choice of the dictionary project principals. It may be that people working
on the ICT side of this need to take the initiative in bringing the attention of
language experts to these kinds of issues and talking about what to do (what
choices make most sense to Yoruba language experts in Nigeria and
abroad?).
This is not a unique case.
There are people who feel they have a very legitimate case for something other
than Unicode. Not long ago, for instance, someone on U-A was
proposing a new ISO-8859 for the Latin transcription of Tamazight (this was
discussed out and I think laid to rest). Good cases or not, they will
carry the day - with all the longer term costs that implies - unless there
is more proactivity on the part of those working for a common standard
for world scripts (Unicode).
At one point the possibility of
workshops or a "road show" on Unicode was discussed. Such a thing, if it
can be funded, would need to look beyond awareness-raising to engaging
linguistics experts on the topic of Unicode (the latter is being done on a
small scale by RIFAL in some countries like Niger). Is there still interest in
that idea?
Don Osborn
Bisharat.net
|
- Re: Battles lost before they begin? Don Osborn
- Re: Battles lost before they begin? Chris Jacobs
- Re: Battles lost before they begin? jameskass
- Re: Battles lost before they begin? jameskass
- Re: Battles lost before they begin? Chris Jacobs

