> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On > Behalf Of Peter Kirk
> > "As the universal character encoding scheme, the Unicode Standard must > > also respond to scholarly needs. To preserve world cultural heritage, > > important archaic scripts are encoded as proposals are developed." > > (1.1.2) > > Well, the Phoenician proposal fits with the second sentence here, but it > seems to have totally ignored the first sentence: the scholarly needs as > expressed by the majority of scholars of the proposed script as reported > on this list have apparently been rejected as irrelevant. This is utterly false. It assumes a premise that is completely invalid: that the only want to accommodate the need of Semitic scholars is to reject a proposal for distinct encoding of PH. It has repeatedly been stated / explained / demonstrated that distinct encoding of PH does not imply that the needs of Semitic cannot be served. > I am glad of > this clear statement that the standard *must* respond to scholarly > needs, and I trust that this imperative will be taken into account by > the UTC in its discussions. It most certainly will. But that necessity in no way eliminates the possibility of encoding PH as a distinct set of characters. Peter Constable
