Michael Everson wrote:
At 10:34 -0700 2004-04-29, Peter Kirk wrote:
But what answer do you have to my point, made in more detail elsewhere, that it will cause total confusion, and defeat the purposes of Unicode, if some people use the new characters and others don't?
Frankly I'd say it's an unreasonable suggestion on your part. NO ONE is forced to use Sinhala, Brahmi, Myanmar, or Devanagari script to represent Buddhist texts in Pali. Scholars, and the Pali Text Society, happily ignore these scripts and use Latin. Similarly, NO ONE will be forced to use Phoenician script to represent early Phoenician language if they find it hard to read and prefer to represent it in Hebrew script, or in Latin.
Michael, Peter is not talking about the Phoenician language being represented in the Hebrew script, he is talking about the common practice of semiticists to *encode* the Phoenician script using Hebrew codepoints. The representation of the text is in Phoenician glyphs, not Hebrew, but these glyphs are treated as typeface variants of Hebrew.
At first, I too thought Peter was talking about transliteration into Hebrew script, but today I realised that he was talking about encoding Phoenician glyphs as Hebrew characters.
John Hudson
--
Tiro Typeworks www.tiro.com Vancouver, BC [EMAIL PROTECTED]
I often play against man, God says, but it is he who wants
to lose, the idiot, and it is I who want him to win.
And I succeed sometimes
In making him win.
- Charles Peguy
