--- "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@...>
wrote:

> Richard Wordingham wrote:
> >
> > --- In qalam@yahoogroups.com, Michael Everson
> <everson@...> wrote:
> > > At 01:29 +0000 2005-08-09, suzmccarth wrote:
> >
> > > I would expect a keyboard to be able to access
> > > all the characters. There are not that many.
> >
> > 284 in the proposal. That seems a lot to me, even
> > if you rely on the digits on the keypad for
> > numbers. You couldn't squeeze them all in just
> > using SHIFT and ALT-GR. CTRL and ALT are
> > pretty well reserved to applications. You may

well

> > have to resort to dead keys for the diacritics,
> > though they won't always be obvious - for keying,
> > is it CU or YU that is JU with a vertical pair of
> > dots added?
> >
> > The key stickers would be pretty cramped - 6
> > character per key! (4 Vai and 1 or 2 ASCII
> > characters marked.)
> >
> > > >How does this contrast with other scripts in
> > > Unicode?
> > >
> > > Um. Suzanne, this question is not specific
> > > enough to answer.
> > >
> > > Any set may be subsetted.
> >
> > CJK is probably the most heavily subsetted in
> > terms of numbers omitted characters.
> >
> > And the 'Latin script' most heavily of all in
> > terms of percentages.
>
> Once again, what does all this business of how
> Unicode or computers handle scripts have to do with
> _writing systems_?

Please clarify for us the difference between "script"
and "writing system" above so that we can see how
you have not just answered your own question.

Andrew Dunbar.

> --
> Peter T. Daniels
> grammatim@...
>

http://en.wiktionary.org -- http://linguaphile.sf.net/cgi-bin/translator.pl

Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com