Tom, Thank you for taking an interest in this matter.
You said, Mapping multiple scripts to Latin-1 codepoints is contrary to the most basic principles of Unicode and represents a backwards technology leap of 20 years or more. Well, do you otherwise agree that the transliteration is good? It can be typed easily, and certainly not like the Unicode Indic transliteration that is only good for Aliens to discover some day. Unicode has a principle about shapes assigned to characters. It is the opposite of what you said. At the time I started this project Unicode version 2 specifically said that it does not define shapes. That is the reason I tried it. Think of it as a help for the person that types. I tested it on real people. They are unaware that the underlying codes are that of Latin. They are surprised and elated. So, if you are so averse to changing the shapes of Latin-1, what would you say about Fraktur and Gaelic that the standard specifically said are based on Latin-1 but have different shapes? You said, It doesn't seem realistic to me that it could ever see acceptance, and I'm a bit surprised that you continue to devote your talents to promoting it. Is there some reason you consider it to be promising nonetheless? (Thank you for calling me talented. I am not). It depends on whose acceptance you are talking about. You'll understand if you are a Singhalese, Tom. The leap 20 years back is what we need. Unicode parked us in a cul de sac. BTW, I haven't even started to promote it. I want the IT community to say this works, as it really does. Think why people Anglicize in this very popular web site: www.sinhalaya.com There are many such. (try elakiri.com) You will see some Unicode Sinhala, but most posts are written using hack fonts and made into graphics to post. The Lankan government is so worried that they have launched a program to teach English to everyone perhaps seeing the demise of Singhala due to digital creep. (Wisdom of politicians!). Also look at the web site of the IT agency of the government: http://www.icta.lk/ How much prominence did they give the language of the 70%? The bureaucrats are giving themselves medals. (See the pictures). They are making laws forcing the government employees to use Unicode Singhala, because they are reluctant. It's a Third World country. The literacy rate is 90% plus, not a little India. But the people are docile. They depend on the government to tell what todo. The bureaucracy in return depends on the West to tell them what is right. The technocrats call themselves යුනිකේත (Love UNI!) Yes, Tom, I do have a very good reason. I know it because I am a Singhalese. It is *practical* and being accepted and commended by everyone that I showed it to. If English, German, Spanish, Icelandic, Danish etc. use Latin-1, and if Singhala *can* perfectly map to Latin-1, why shouldn't it? That is called transliteration. Recall that English fully romanized about year 600. Singhala is a minority language that is scheduled to be executed, and Unicode is unwittingly the reason. Brahmi probably is Old Singhala. The oldest Brahmi was found in Shree Langkaa (Sri Lanka) 2-3 centuries before it was seen in India. Some say Singhalese founded the Mayans. (What a chauvinist!). So, let's give it a boost before World Ends. I need the support of Unicode, which is like World Government for Laangkans. This is what I want Unicode to judge: - Is the transliteration practical? - Do I have a round trip conversion with precious Unicode Sinhala? Help us, Tom. This message is getting too long.I can list pros and cons of Dual-script Singhala and Unicode Sinhala to convince any techie why we should forget Unicode Sinhala. Let me end with a quote from SICP http://mitpress.mit.edu/sicp/full-text/book/book.html Educators, generals, dieticians, psychologists, and parents program. Armies, students, and some societies are programmed. An assault on large problems employs a succession of programs, most of which spring into existence en route. These programs are rife with issues that appear to be particular to the problem at hand. To appreciate programming as an intellectual activity in its own right you must turn to computer programming; you must read and write computer programs -- many of them. It doesn't matter much what the programs are about or what applications they serve. What does matter is how well they perform and how smoothly they fit with other programs in the creation of still greater programs. *The programmer must seek both perfection of part and adequacy of collection.* Do we want to be programmed or be programmers? Is the collection adequate? Best regards, JC On Thu, Jun 14, 2012 at 8:08 AM, Tom Gewecke <[email protected]> wrote: > naenaguru wrote: > > Map sounds to QWERTY extended key layouts adding non-English letters -> > Result: strict, rule based alphabet extending from ASCII to Latin-1 -> > > > Mapping multiple scripts to Latin-1 codepoints is contrary to the most > basic principles of Unicode and represents a backwards technology leap of > 20 years or more. It doesn't seem realistic to me that it could ever see > acceptance, and I'm a bit surprised that you continue to devote your > talents to promoting it. Is there some reason you consider it to be > promising nonetheless? >
