Peter Constable wrote, > I'm sure even Youtie would go for this.
Except that she's too busy writing new lyrics for Janis Joplin tunes. Ernest Cline wrote, > ... This indicates to me that variation > sequences are a potential solution that should be considered, > even if it ends up being rejected in favor of disunification. In order for Phoenician to be "disunified" from Hebrew, it must first have been unified with Hebrew. This is not the case. (If anyone can cite from TUS any passage recommending that Phoenician text should be encoded using Hebrew characters, I'll stand corrected.) Variation sequences could be very helpful to distinguish variants in plain text. But, if every character in an entire text needs to have a corresponding variant selector in order for the text to render as expected, then that's a strong argument in favor of a separate encoding. Variation sequences could be used to distinguish glyph variants between Phoenician and neo-Punic, though, or even between neo-Punic and neo-Punic. If members of any discipline need such granularity in plain text, say epigraphers or numismatists, then they'll float a proposal and the proposal can be judged on its merits. Somebody> "You should use graphics for such distinctions." Graphics aren't part of plain text. Somebody> "Well then, you should just use mark-up." Neither is mark-up. Best regards, James Kass
