- From: Martin Duerst <duerst@it.aoyama.ac.jp>
- Date: Wed, 17 Aug 2005 11:06:46 +0900
- To: Stephen Deach <sdeach@adobe.com>, Jony Rosenne <rosennej@qsm.co.il>, "'Stephen Deach'" <sdeach@adobe.com>
- Cc: www-international@w3.org
At 01:05 05/08/16, Stephen Deach wrote: > >Yes, they are scripts (I said so). > >Martin indicated he had a list of language-to-script correlations. I'ld like to see it. No, I didn't. What some people (including to some extent you) claimed is that knowing the language can be used to determine directionality. What I said was that for most scripts, including some of those written RTL, the list of languages using that script is essentially open. I.e. I very much claim that I don't have such a correlation, and I also claim that nobody else has such a correlation that is complete. This prohibits implementation of generic language-to-direction mappings that would be needed in browsers to be able to substitute language information for explicit directionality information. Regards, Martin. >At 2005.08.15-18:45(+0200), Jony Rosenne wrote: >>These are scripts, not languages. >> >>The Hebrew script, for instance, is routinely used for at least three >>languages and rarely used for many more. >> >>The Arabic script is used for a number of languages today, and historically >>for many more. >> >>Jony >> >> > -----Original Message----- >> > From: www-international-request@w3.org >> > [mailto:www-international-request@w3.org] On Behalf Of John Cowan >> > Stephen Deach scripsit: >> > >> > > The only scripts identified as RTL in Unicode are Arabic >> > and Hebrew. >> > >> > In fact, Syriac and Tifinagh are already encoded in Unicode, >> > as well as the >> > archaic scripts Cypriot and Kharoshthi. Phoenician has been >> > fully blessed >> > and will be in the next version. >> > >> > Still in the long tail are Old Hungarian (aka rovasiras), >> > Avestan, Mandaic, >> > Samaritan, Manichaean, and perhaps others.
Received on Wednesday, 17 August 2005 10:29:11 UTC