chrislit at crosswire.org
Mon Aug 6 00:31:52 MST 2012
On 8/6/2012 12:01 AM, David Haslam wrote:
> Further to my last reply, I think we can safely assume that we are more
> likely to process *Chinese* text
> than any of the scripts that require characters from the *Supplementary
> Multilingual Plane*.
> Range Block Code Points
> 10000..1007F Linear B Syllabary 128
> 10080..100FF Linear B Ideograms 128
Some fancy Greek dictionaries could certainly include Linear B.
> 10300..1032F Old Italic 48
No biblical material here, but fancy Latin dictionaries could certainly
include Old Italic characters. And there are some interesting and
extensive texts in Oscan & Umbrian, but not necessarily worth our
encoding. (My only contribution of new codepoints to Unicode thus far
has been in this block.)
> 10380..1039F Ugaritic 32
I could definitely see us encoding some Ugaritic texts. It's an
important language for comparison of early Judaism to its local context
and even for better understanding some elements of OT Hebrew.
> 10400..1044F Deseret 80
Eh... Book of Mormon made less legible?
> 10840..1085F Imperial Aramaic 32
> 10900..1091F Phoenician 32
Hebrew dictionaries, etc.
> 10B00..10B3F Avestan 64
I would totally encode the Avesta if I could find a good PD source and
figure out how to un-transliterate it.
> 12000..123FF Cuneiform 1,024
> 12400..1247F Cuneiform Numbers and Punctuation 128
There are lots of worthwhile Sumerian, Akkadian, & Hittite documents in
this script. And Hebrew dictionaries could definitely incorporate
Akkadian, and possibly Sumerian and Hittite.
> 16F00..16F9F Miao 160
This script was actually invented for Bibles.
More information about the sword-devel