RE: Codes for codes for codes for... (RE: Chromatic font research )

From: Marco Cimarosti (
Date: Thu Jun 27 2002 - 14:23:43 EDT

Doug Ewell wrote:
> I think the reason the Braille block is legitimate, and doesn't fall
> into the codes-for-codes trap you described, is that it is a flexible
> cipher rather than a fixed one. The same Braille symbol can stand for
> different letters depending on which script, or even which alphabet
> within the same script, it is used to represent. And then
> there's Grade
> 2 Braille, which completely breaks the "simple cipher" model.

I stand corrected.

_ Marco

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Thu Jun 27 2002 - 12:50:34 EDT