Peter Constable wrote: > 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). > > I was not involved in those discussions so cannot comment on > them. I just wish to point out that the MCW representation of > Hebrew most certain *is* supported in Unicode: MCW uses ASCII > Latin letters and punctuation characters to stand for Hebrew > letters, vowel points and accents, and those exact same ASCII > characters are encoded in Unicode. In fact, any existing > MCW/ASCII-encoded file of Hebrew text is, in fact, also > MCW/Unicode-encoded since the representation of Basic Latin > characters at the character encoding form and character > encoding scheme levels is exactly the same for ASCII as it is > for Unicode: > Hebrew MCS/ASCII MCS/Unicode > literal code unit literal UTF-8 > ------------------------------------------------ > alef ) 0x29 ) 0x29 > bet B 0x42 B 0x42 > gimel G 0x47 G 0x47 > ... > To encode any different from this in Unicode to support MCW > texts would have been fairly bad news for the people that use > it.
Is it a joke? UTF-8 designates Unicode codepoints refering to Unicode abstract characters with all their semantic (including the character name and properties). This table looks like a tweak. Or it is not correctly explained here: what is MCS and MCW above? You can't say that the tableabove is ASCII not either Unicode. It's only a separate legacy 7-bit encoding.. which is probably not widely interoperable because unimplemented or not documented in the same common places as where ASCII and Unicode are defined.
