Template talk:Script

Old Church Slavonic

How to go about adding support for Old Church Slavonic and Church Slavonic for this template?

Unicode 5.1 recently added quite a few characters to properly support these, and there are only a few fonts available with partial support so far. More info at wikt:Appendix:Old Cyrillic alphabet and wikt:Appendix talk:Old Cyrillic alphabet.

These languages both (unfortunately) share language codes cu/chu/chu, and are supposed to be used with the script code Cyrs (see Early Cyrillic alphabet), which has different typographic standards from the modern Cyrillic alphabet (Cyrl). In case it matters, Old East Slavic (orv) and other languages may require or optionally use this script.

A suitable font list currently would be "Menaion, Menaion Medieval, Dilyana, Code2000, Lazov", but due to incomplete support would have to be updated as soon as better fonts are available. A larger font size would be beneficial too, since these fonts are very small. This should probably be applied in all browsers, not just MSIE, because the set of code points used overlaps with regular Cyrillic, and a mix of font families would be unreadable and terribly ugly.

A suitable short name for this would be Slavonic, which is commonly used in a historical and academic context.

Thanks for any advice. —Michael Z. 2008-05-06 22:36 z

I gave it a try. Please see {{Slavonic}}. —Michael Z. 2008-05-08 06:54 z

Cuneiform template errors

Template:Script/Cuneiform, which renders Akkadian cuneiform characters, is supposed to be able to display both Classical Sumerian and Neo-Assyrian signs, by adding a number, 4 for Sumerian and 7 for Neo-Assyrian. Currently, the template only displays Classical Sumerian signs regardless of the input: 𒊕 and 𒊕 look the exact same when they are supposed to look quite different (see numbers 4 and 7 in the image to the right). This is an issue since articles using the cuneiform template for Neo-Assyrian stuff, such as the Neo-Assyrian kings, produce correct Akkadian spellings but with antiquated signs that would not have been used by these figures themselves. The article on Sinsharishkun renders his name as 𒀭𒈗𒃻𒌦 while he himself rendered it as (the same four signs having undergone ~2000 years of development). Hopefully this is a fixable issue given that the template is supposed to support both renditions. Ichthyovenator (talk) 09:48, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Apparently this issue is not experienced by everyone (see here) - but for me the template does not display Sumerian and Neo-Assyrian differently (showing Sumerian regardless of input), which is an issue since some readers will thus not see them differently either. Even if it does work, it also appears that some signs (particularly 𒌶 apparently) do not display in Neo-Assyrian even for those who do see the template correctly. Ichthyovenator (talk) 10:30, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

All this depends on what fonts you have installed. For me, according to my browser's Inspector, the 4 text displays with Segoe UI Historic (a font not specified by the CSS added by the template, but chosen by my browser) and the 7 text with Noto Sans Cuneiform. (They are not perceptibly different, which is odd; perhaps one has borrowed glyphs from the other or they both derived glyphs from a common source.) If you haven't got any of the fonts specified in either the 4 or the 7 CSS, you'll probably have the same font applied to both. For how to identify the font used by the browser, I wrote wikt:Wiktionary:Unicode#Identifying a font because this keeps coming up in Wiktionary discussions.

From my experience on Wiktionary, I've concluded that the only way to really solve this issue is with webfonts. Without webfonts users have to install one of the fonts specified in the CSS. Neither Wiktionary nor Wikipedia loads webfonts anywhere that I've noticed, but Wikisource has mw:Extension:UniversalLanguageSelector installed, which loads webfonts, as described in s:Template:Lang/doc#Web Fonts. — Eru·tuon 17:31, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Unicode

Does Unicode have this distinction? DePiep (talk) 20:18, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

As in different code points for different historical forms of cuneiform characters? I'm not very familiar with cuneiform, but no in the case of the character mentioned above, 𒊕 (U+12295 CUNEIFORM SIGN SAG), and perhaps no in general. — Eru·tuon 23:23, 11 September 2021 (UTC)

Yes, that distinction to look for. Cuneiform in Unicode is described in Chapter 11 [1].

11.1 Cuneiform, Sumero-Akkadian; 11.2 Ugaritic; 11.3 Old Persian.

Identified as script (ISO 15924), but currently not in Unicode: Proto-cuneiform numerals, Proto-Elamite § Proto-Elamite script. -DePiep (talk) 08:04, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

I see. I'll look into trying to install the right fonts and see if I can see the change. Given that the fonts in this case can distinguish between different stages of the cuneiform script and I'd wager many readers miss the needed fonts in the same way I do, I still think that perhaps there should be some solution which doesn't require readers to install new fonts to see the text correctly. Without the correct fonts, the names of the Neo-Assyrian kings display in Classic Sumerian cuneiform, which is anachronistic to say the least. As I also mentioned, some signs (𒌶) apparently do not display correctly in Neo-Assyrian even if the fonts are installed. Ichthyovenator (talk) 16:26, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

The solution that doesn't require users to install fonts is an extension that loads webfonts, which I mentioned above. — Eru·tuon 02:11, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Right. I'm not able to implement something like that but perhaps someone more knowledgeable would be able to take a look when they have the time. Ichthyovenator (talk) 08:05, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

I think webfonts require the help of the Wikimedia developers. The extension that provides webfonts on Wikisource, UniversalLanguageSelector extension is already installed on Wikipedia, but I haven't seen evidence that it provides webfonts and the page on Wikisource seems to indicate that it doesn't provide webfonts for different styles of cuneiform (I only see Akkadian mentioned, not Sumerian or Hittite or Old Persian). So perhaps you would need to find free fonts for different styles of cuneiform, obtain consensus for webfonts through a Wikipedia discussion, and then write a Phabricator request to ask the Wikimedia developers to turn on the webfont feature of the extension and to add free webfonts for different styles of cuneiform to the extension. I'm guessing here though because I haven't seen how they got it set up on Wikisource. — Eru·tuon 18:02, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

• I think when Unicode does not differentiate, the font-setting will be complicated (unsolved) forever. These are the current options in {{Script/Cuneiform}}:

cuneiform scrip options

from documentation: |sux|4 = Akkadian" title="Classical Sumerian cuneiform" |akk|elx|xeb|xhu|5 = Akkadian" title="Neo-Sumerian cuneiform" |hit = UllikummiA, Assurbanipal, CuneiformNA,'Noto Sans Cuneiform'" title="Hittite cuneiform"<!-- preference for Ullikummi, later cuneiform styles as last resort --!> |xht|xlu|6 = 'Free Idg Serif',Akkadian,'Noto Sans Cuneiform','Noto Sans Sumero-Akkadian Cuneiform','Segoe UI Historic';" title="Old Assyrian cuneiform"<!-- use Akkadian, Noto, and Segoe as last resort --> |7 = CuneiformNA,Assurbanipal,Akkadian,'Noto Sans Cuneiform','Noto Sans Sumero-Akkadian Cuneiform','Segoe UI Historic';" title="Neo-Assyrian cuneiform"<!-- use Akkadian, Noto, and Segoe as last resort --> |peo = Behistun, Aegean, 'Old Persian';" title="Old Persian cuneiform" |#default = 'Segoe UI Historic','Akkadian','Noto Sans Cuneiform','Noto Sans Sumero-Akkadian Cuneiform';" title="cuneiform text"

That is: six ID's + default. How dow we ever think to solve this? -DePiep (talk) 19:21, 12 September 2021 (UTC)

more protection?

This template currently has 1600+ transclusions, and it often appears in lead sections. Does anyone mind if we elevate its protection, as the risk of vandalism seems high? --Joy [shallot] (talk) 07:59, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

See a monthly parameter usage report for Template:Script in articles.: 11k tc's in 862 articles. However, I did not see any vandalisme. -DePiep (talk) 11:55, 13 September 2021 (UTC)

Cuneiform template problems

Template:Script/Cuneiform renders the Neo-Assyrian forms of most cuneiform signs, however it refuses to render some signs such as 𒌶 and 𒉢, which appear no different from the Sumerian forms when I use the code for Neo-Assyrian in the template. Antiquistik (talk) 15:44, 14 September 2021 (UTC)

Other fonts

Is there any way for users to allow other fonts to be used? On one of the machines I use, the only Tai Tham font I can use (Da Lekh) is not on the list, and the only way I can get it to be used is to remove the {{Script|Lana}} wrapper. On Wiktionary I can get round the problem by editing my custom CSS file, but the template here works differently. — Preceding unsigned comment added by RichardW57m (talk • contribs) 09:39, 9 November 2021 (UTC)

Typo in visual editor view

The description for the text parameter says "The text in the script demacrated" in visual editor view. flod logic (talk) 07:55, 22 May 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 28 September 2022

please add <noformat>|Kawi = {{{2}}}</noformat>

펑홍한talk 03:58, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Done DRMcCreedy (talk) 19:02, 28 September 2022 (UTC)

Extended-confirmed-protected edit request on 21 December 2022

Thai alphabet for Northern Thai language

Can you add Thai alphabet for Northern Thai language?

|Lana-Thai = {{Script/Thai|1={{{2}}}}}

Nickicooo (talk) 11:27, 21 December 2022 (UTC)

 Not done (as to the immediate edit request)) as the target page, Template:Script/Thai, does not exist. This discussion section can still be used to discuss the request for improvement, and someone may take up this idea and develop it in the meantime. — xaosflux ^Talk 11:44, 22 December 2022 (UTC)

Script template inside lang templates?

Hey all, I wanted to clarify if there is any reason to use this template inside lang templates (e.g. as done here), or is that redundant?
(I've generally not seen this done before, but I'm not clear on what the script template really does either.) R Prazeres (talk) 15:35, 1 April 2024 (UTC)