L.M.Fosse at internet.no L.M.Fosse at internet.no
Mon Jul 1 15:35:43 UTC 1996

Dominik wrote:

>I would like to note that no one system of 7-bit transliteration is better
>than another, as long as they are all unambigouous and clearly documented.
>There is no need to be partisan in this matter, or even to suggest that
>someone else should use your chosen system.  Simple search-and-replace
>operations, especially with such tools as the Unix SED, make converting
>between systems a matter of a few seconds.

For once I do not entirely agree with Dominik. If we use 7-bit coding, two
things are necessary: 1) an acceptable level of readability; 2) easy
conversion into other representation systems (e.g. CSX). If we have a mixed
text (e.g. both English and Sanskrit), we should be able to do
search-and-replace without damage to the English text. This we cannot do
with the Harvard-Kyoto system. It therefore falls foul of point 2). The
Hiroshima system described by Birgitte Kellner, on the other hand, falls
foul of point 1), as far as I am able to judge. The TZ-system is quite
unambiguous, easy to read (I have read a lot of Sanskrit in TZ), and there
is no problem converting it into other representations. However, if others
feel comfortable with other kinds of representation, I am not going to tell
them to go ahead and use "my" transliteration system. Everybody has a right
to a choice. I just do not think that they are all equally good.

Best regards,

Lars Martin

Dr. art. Lars Martin Fosse
Haugerudveien 76, Leil. 114,
N-0674 OSLO Norway

Tel: +47 22 32 12 19
Fax: +47 22 32 12 19

E-mail: L.M.Fosse at internet.no

More information about the INDOLOGY mailing list