Michael Everson wrote:
>
> At 08:13 -0400 2003-09-16, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
> >That's the chart of Epigraphic Semitic scripts; Arabic is included,
> >but none of the descendants beginning with Perso-Arabic. I have the
> >impression that Michael tends to defend whatever the Unicode
> >engineers have come up with, regardless of its relation to history
> >or practicality.
>
> I shouldn't think so. It's clear that the Persians added characters
> to the Arabic script, and the Pashtun and the Urdus and the Sindhis
> added even more of them. I do not think that the Persians invented a
> new script.
>
> Your (new) suggestion that there is something wrong with the Unicode
> encoding of the Arabic script puzzles me, because it works very well
> for the representation of all of the languages listed here and many
> more.

I know nothing of its encoding. But its label is stupid.
--
Peter T. Daniels grammatim@...