> From: Peter Kirk [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] > Sent: Wednesday, May 26, 2004 1:08 PM
> >Legibility is *one* consideration. Certainly we must use it consistently > >wrt PH as for other cases. But now that we have established what that > >means (some people find PH used for Hebrew text to be illegible, so > >distinct encoding *may* be warranted), we don't need to refer to Fraktur > >any further to apply it to PH. > If we can all agree that legibility is not a sufficient criterion on its > own for encoding Phoenician and Palaeo-Hebrew separately, then let's > indeed move on and see if there are any other technical arguments for > separate encoding. I don't remember seeing any. Saying that legibility is not a sufficient criterion does not imply that it is irrelevant or non technical. The *only* conclusion we can make from the preceding is that there is no reason whatsoever to continue discussing Fraktur when what we are really trying to make decisions on is PH. And, since legibility is a technical criterion (non-sufficient, but still a necessary consideration), even if there are no *other* reasons, your conclusion > This seems to suggest to > me that there is no technical justification for the proposal. is invalid. For that reason, and because I believe others have provided additional technical reasons, my own response to the question > Can we agree on that? is "no". > If so, we need to ask a more general question: should the UTC encode > scripts for which there is a (small, in this case) demand but no > technical justification? We can ask that question, but I don't think it can be fairly applied to this situation. You say there is no technical justification, but there are technical issues that the pro-unification camp has not yet, that I've noticed, responded to after repeated requests. You continue to insist that the demand is small based on the premise that only a few individuals on this list have said they have a need -- but there are often no more than a small number of members of a user community for a given script or characters subscribed to this list, and the number of pro-unification and anti-unification opinions that have been voiced here by people claiming to be part of the user community(ies) is not significantly different. Peter Peter Constable Globalization Infrastructure and Font Technologies Microsoft Windows Division
