Re: How about a typology for input methods

Peter T. Daniels scripsit:

> > So Arabic, Hebrew, Syriac are not abjads?
>
> Unvocalized, they are. Add the points, and they're alphabets.

Most modern Arabic and Hebrew texts, however, are neither fully pointed
nor fully unpointed: rather, they are strategically pointed with matres
lectionis.

> > He said he was misled by the way *Unicode* encodes Ethiopic: one code per
> > sillable, as it does with genuine syllabaries such as katakana or Cherokee.
>
> Well, Unicode has nothing to do with script typology! It just does
> things as they're convenient. Doesn't it have to handle syllabically the
> Indic scripts that have idiosyncratic treatments of -u, for instance (I
> think Malayalam is one of them)?

No. All nine Indic scripts are encoded in exactly the same way, and all
presentation issues are left up to the script engine or font engine.

--
At the end of the Metatarsal Age, the dinosaurs John Cowan
abruptly vanished. The theory that a single jcowan@...
catastrophic event may have been responsible www.reutershealth.com
has been strengthened by the recent discovery of www.ccil.org/~cowan
a worldwide layer of whipped cream marking the
Creosote-Tutelary boundary. --Science Made Stupid