--- In qalam@yahoogroups.com, "Peter T. Daniels" <grammatim@...>
wrote:

> suzmccarth wrote:

but now see how Unicode is a significant player in script

> > standardization.
>
> And we see from the attitudes expressed here that they don't give

a damn

> about "native" sensibilities.

Whoa! Unicode responds to language communities. There is no doubt
about that. The problem is that language communities are complex
entities.

I enjoy using Unicode products. But I do see Unicode as having a
process that the public should particpate in and become knowledgable
about. I am just participating in a very small way in that process.

And I certainly didn't say that Christianity contributed to script
instability - nonsense. I was responding to your remark that the
Cherokee script had a sacred function. I attributed that, rightly or
wrongly, to the 'medicine man' tradition as recorded in Walker's
article. I *thought* that is what you were talking about.

Suzanne