At 12:38 -0700 2004-05-24, E. Keown wrote:
Leading computational Hebraists in the late 1980s tried to persuade Unicode planners to include a non-public but very widely used academic Biblical
Hebrew code, Michigan-Claremont-Westminster, in Unicode....They were rebuffed (or, if you will, perceived themselves to be rebuffed).
Why not make a mapping table?
So the idea that Semitists who are famous worldwide are going to be ignored again doesn't sit well with anyone.
No one is being "ignored", Elaine. Please see Patrick Durusau's comment:
To answer John's later question about what uses other Semitic scholars see for the Phoenician proposal, the ones that have been voiced to me include, grammars and other pedagogical materials, and more general publications.
Patrick, of the Society for Biblical Literature, has said the *same* thing that we have been saying all along, just as it is recognized that some other Semitic scholars would not make use of such an encoding, as Hebrew suits their purposes better, and just as it is recognized that some other Semitic scholars would not make use of such an encoding, as Latin suits their purposes better. Of course, Patrick and the SBL may not be "famous" or "important" enough to convince some of you.
I maintain, as others have, that the proposal to encode Phoenician in the UCS is inclusive of user needs. The suggestion that the universe of Semitic-language databases and archives will be "damaged" by the encoding is baseless.
--
Michael Everson * * Everson Typography * * http://www.evertype.com
