[iso15924-jac] Re: Last call for ISO 15924-based updates

[Michael Everson]

I don't want to get into a big discussion about this.

On 16 Mar 2009, at 14:35, Mark Davis wrote:

> > Well, to be completely fair, "inherited script" isn't a script  
> either.
>
> To be completely fair, the situation is not black and white.

I would have said much the same.

> There is a difference between a special code (mul, und, Zxxx, and so  
> on) used for implementations, and IPA or polytonic Greek. Codes like  
> Zzzz or Zinh are really special purpose, and are much different in  
> scale and usage. Polytonic Greek is clearly an orthographic  
> difference within a script. IPA is further away from being a simple  
> orthographic difference, including that it actually shares  
> characters not only with Latin but also with Greek and Cyrillic.

It shares three characters and only three characters with Greek, and  
none with Cyrillic. BETA, CHI, and THETA are Greek letters used in  
IPA, and there are good arguments to disunify at least the first two  
and encode Latin variants of these.

> And for another, 15924 already has variants like Latf -- it would  
> not be a great stretch to add major othographic variants.

But Latf and Latg were encoded for bibliographic use, not as a matter  
of orthography. An orthographic text in Irish or German might be  
identical in orthographic content, but not in this major visual  
variant. The functionality would, for instance, be to assist someone  
using interlibary loan to specify that he wanted a book that was, or  
that was not, in Gaelic script.

Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com