At 09:10 -0400 2003-09-16, Peter T. Daniels wrote:

> > 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.

You shock me, sir. The epigraphic Arabic script which evolved into
the "script" Arabic script received letter-extensions from some other
languages, but the intrinsic structure of the script remains the same.

Similarly, the epigraphic Latin script evolved variant letterforms
such as the capital/small letter distinction, italics and bold and
all, also received letter-extensions for other languages.

There are not "better" names out there than "Arabic" and "Latin" out
there to describe these scripts. "Islamic" palls and isn't accurate
in any case.

Sorry to disagree with you, but I don't think your objections make any sense.
--
Michael Everson * * Everson Typography * * http://www.evertype.com