Path: utzoo!utgpu!news-server.csri.toronto.edu!bonnie.concordia.ca!uunet!elroy.jpl.nasa.gov!sdd.hp.com!cs.utexas.edu!rice!uupsi!cmcl2!lanl!cochiti.lanl.gov!jlg
From: jlg@cochiti.lanl.gov (Jim Giles)
Newsgroups: comp.std.internat
Subject: Navajo?  (was: universality of Latin-1)
Message-ID: <22694@lanl.gov>
Date: 26 Apr 91 16:35:58 GMT
References: <1991Apr10.172756.4991@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> <1991Apr12.001902.9260@timessqr.gc.cuny.edu> <1991Apr12.123302.17817@murdoch.acc.Virginia.EDU> <1991Apr24.181121.6212@parc.xerox.com>
Sender: news@lanl.gov
Organization: Los Alamos National Laboratory
Lines: 16

In article <1991Apr24.181121.6212@parc.xerox.com>, daniels@parc.xerox.com (Andy Daniels) writes:
|> [...]
|> Sufficient for you, perhaps, but not for me. By your criteria, DIS
|> 10646 doesn't support Rhade, a close neighbor of Vietnamese, nor does
|> it support Navajo. Moving away from Latin, where's Tamil? where's
|> Tibetan?
              ^^^^^^

Could you be more specific?  The Navajo never had their own writing
(the only indian tribe that did are the Cheyenne).  To be sure, the
linguists have special symbols for phonemes of indian languages, but
they have that for all languages and I doubt there's any advantage
trying to include them all in a character set.  For the most part,
all Navajo I've seen written was in the ordinary Latin alphabet.

J. Giles