Markus Scherer <markus dot icu at gmail dot com> wrote: > As Michael said, I don't have information. But I found this which > might help: > http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Blissymbols#Towards_the_international_standardization_of_the_script
Statements in the linked article such as the following (not written by Markus) always trouble me: "The proposed encoding does not use the lexical encoding model used in the existing ISO-IR/169 registered character set, but instead applies the Unicode and ISO character-glyph model to the Bliss-character model already adopted by BCI, since this would significantly reduce the number of needed characters." since my understanding has always been that the reasons behind the character-glyph model go much deeper than reducing the number of encoded characters. -- Doug Ewell | Thornton, CO, USA | http://ewellic.org _______________________________________________ Unicode mailing list [email protected] http://unicode.org/mailman/listinfo/unicode
