- From: Arron Eicholz <Arron.Eicholz@microsoft.com>
- Date: Wed, 20 Apr 2011 20:00:49 +0000
- To: Tab Atkins Jr. <jackalmage@gmail.com>, Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>
- CC: "www-style@w3.org" <www-style@w3.org>
On Wednesday, April 20, 2011 11:39 AM Tab Atkins Jr. wrote: > On Wed, Apr 20, 2011 at 3:04 AM, Daniel Glazman > <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com> wrote: > > Le 20/04/11 01:55, Tab Atkins Jr. a écrit : > > > >> 7. Are Aegean (U+10107-10133), Shavian (U+10450-1047F), and Ugaritic > >> (U+10380-1039D) things I should address? I dunno if these are living > >> or dead scripts. > > > > > > Aegean and Ugaritic are extinct. Scholars wanting to include sections > > of a document using those scripts are not :-) But I never saw a list > > numbered in Ugaritic on a tablet or anything else. > > Apparently, Ugaritic numbers were usually written as words (3 = > > "three"). > > > > Aegean is more problematic since it does have glyphs for numbers and > > those appeared in artifacts. > > > > Shavian is a recently constructed script for English. I have never > > ever seen a live example of shavian script nor have I ever met anyone > > able to write/read it. > > Okay, I was just checking if they were currently-living languages. > Dead, scholarly, or constructed languages can be done by the author defining > a @counter-style of their own. I won't add them to the default style sheet, > then. > I wouldn't get rid of them all together. Just put them in a non-normative section for reference. If some UA wants to add them they can. This would at least give a good starting point how the style would be formed. I would also put a note in that section that the scripts and the examples may not fully cover all the writing mode quirks since the scripts are ancient and/or extinct. -- Thanks, Arron Eicholz
Received on Wednesday, 20 April 2011 20:01:17 UTC