A comment on draft-faltstrom-idnabis-tables-05.txt

[Eric Brunner-Williams]

Martin Duerst wrote:
> Hello Eric,
>
> At 09:09 08/04/07, Eric Brunner-Williams wrote:
>
>   
>>    o the code points for UCAS, not that I'm particularly fond of the "U" or the "C" part of that, as Dirk's approach does make historic texts in Siksika and Carrier and Cree pre-UCAS orthographies more difficult, but it is a script in use;
>>
>> 1401..166C  ; PVALID      # CANADIAN SYLLABICS E..CANADIAN SYLLABICS CAR
>> 166D..166E  ; DISALLOWED  # CANADIAN SYLLABICS CHI SIGN..CANADIAN SYLLAB
>> 166F..1676  ; PVALID      # CANADIAN SYLLABICS QAI..CANADIAN SYLLABICS N
>>     
>
> At the end of your mail, you say that you are pleased to see various
> codepoints valid, but what about the above two disallowed codepoints?
> Is it okay to have them disallowed, or should they be allowed? Just
> to make sure we get as much things right as possible.
>
> Regards,     Martin.
>
>
>
> #-#-#  Martin J. Du"rst, Assoc. Professor, Aoyama Gakuin University
> #-#-#  http://www.sw.it.aoyama.ac.jp       mailto:duerst at it.aoyama.ac.jp     
>
>
>
>   
Hello Martin,

Thank you for writing back.

I'm more interested in the full stop (166e in your table) than in the 
symbol for a foreign cult (166d in the same text).

I'm guessing that the rational for the full stop exclusion is not that 
its "confusingly similar to" some other character, but because it is 
functionally equivalent to "dot" (and is always translated into roman 
script as ".").

Which rational, or something I've not guessed, is present?

Eric