> Well, I'm sorry to say that you won't be able to count me among the
> wildly enthusiastic.
> But as regards the standardization question: proposed de novo writing
> systems, whether they be reformist, personal, artistic, or cryptographical
> in nature, are generally not appropriate candidates for standardization.
> Writing systems must show some actual success and use, to the point where
> there is clear evidence of publication and interchange of data in those
> writing systems, before it makes sense for standards organizations to
> attempt to provide standard character encodings for them.
I agree. But what about major shorthand systems? Some of these
(Gregg, for instance) have been extended to cover many languages,
are in wide use, and have a substantial amount of publication
(besides textbooks and dictionaries, there are editions of some
novels in English Gregg shorthand). Shouldn't they qualify for
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:51 EDT