- From: Simon Montagu <smontagu@smontagu.org>
- Date: Thu, 19 May 2011 10:27:26 +0300
- To: Daniel Glazman <daniel.glazman@disruptive-innovations.com>
- CC: www-style@w3.org
On 04/20/2011 01:04 PM, Daniel Glazman 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. Nevertheless, I don't think there is much of a use case for defining numbering in Aegean or other archaic scripts. Scholars publishing the text from an artifact including a numbered list are surely going to transcribe the numbers as they appear in the original, rather than relying on the automatic numbering in their browser.
Received on Thursday, 19 May 2011 07:27:55 UTC