- From: Russell Galvin <russell@blissymbolics.org>
- Date: Tue, 22 Apr 2025 21:11:32 -0400
- To: public-adapt@w3.org
Hi all, Further to the discussion today of ISO-IR 169, the 1993 standardized encoding of 2300+ Blissymbols in a lexicon fashion - i.e. one code point per Bliss word vs one code point per Bliss character - I think I have determined its current status. ISO-IR 169 was part of ISO/IEC 2022 which was last updated in 1994. ISO/IEC 2022 is a standard that uses control characters to switch between different code pages in a similar way to the ISO/IEC 8859 series of standards. It is no longer supported by most major operating systems. ISO/IEC 2022 was incorporated into ISO 10646 (the Universal Character Set) which is the ISO equivalent standard to Unicode. So, you would think that ISO-IR 169 is thus incorporated into ISO 10646 and thus Unicode...but alas, this is apparently not the case. It appears that when ISO/IEC 2022 transitioned to ISO 10646, it was done in a "curated" fashion and some less mainstream parts were left out, including ISO-IR 169. ChatGPT comes to this conclusion after some prodding, and this seems to jive with what I can dig up regarding the paths of these standards to the current Unicode-centric situation. The good news is... 😂 The coverage of the 800 entries of Ogdens Basic English by ISO-IR 169 is 603 (vs 368 for the current Bliss Unicode proposal single code point characters). These numbers are estimates due to there likely being a few synonym mismatches but it gives a rough estimate. Using a different offset, ISO-IR 169 could be moved to the private use area and provide the basis for the registry...which in fact is exactly equivalent to the current first 2300+ Bliss characters in the registry since they are exactly equivalent to ISO-IR 169! (BCI-IDs are actually an integer representation of the ISO-IR 169 code points) The other 4000 or so Blissymbols in the registry thus represent a natural extension to ISO-IR 169 and I'm sure will fill in a good number of the remaining slots in Ogden's 800. Perhaps I will quantify that in a day or two. Cheers, Russell
Received on Wednesday, 23 April 2025 01:11:49 UTC