Unicode [was Re: Cult-like behaviour]

[Rhodri James]

On 16/07/18 17:05, Mark Lawrence wrote:
> On 16/07/18 15:17, Dan Sommers wrote:
>> On Mon, 16 Jul 2018 10:39:49 +0000, Steven D'Aprano wrote:
>>
>>> ... people who think that if ISO-8859-7 was good enough for Jesus ...
>>
>> It may have been good enough for his disciples, but Jesus spoke Aramaic.
>>
>> Also, ISO-8859-7 doesn't cover ancient polytonic Greek; it only covers
>> modern monotonic Greek.
>>
>> See also the Unicode Greek FAQ (https://www.unicode.org/faq/greek.html).
>>
> 
> Out of curiosity where does my mum's Welsh come into the equation as I 
> believe that it is not recognised by the EU as a language?

Actually the EU does recognise Welsh as a language, just not as an 
official language (one that EU primary and secondary legislation is 
translated into).  It isn't an official language of the UK government 
either, just the Welsh Assembly.

As fonts and Unicode go, there's also a question of what's required to 
correctly notate modern Welsh.  Back in the late 1980s Acorn asked four 
Welsh-language scholars that question.  They got four different answers :-(

-- 
Rhodri James *-* Kynesim Ltd