From: John Cowan (email@example.com)
Date: Tue Jul 15 2003 - 12:05:55 EDT
Michael Everson scripsit:
> >The two letters share not a single formal feature.
> Yes they do. The ring and ear of the top part of a Times g are
> equivalent to the flat line of the Insular g, and the bottom part is
> the same for both, give or take loopiness.
You can find a similar mapping from "t" to "T" as well, and
nobody calls that a font difference. Similarly, I can read
texts with a long s, but not ones in which f has been falsely
substituted for it -- it quickly becomes infuriating. See
http://www.yale.edu/lawweb/avalon/blackstone/bk3ch23.htm and weep.
> >We disunify Glagolitic, and rightly so too. But that does not mean
> >that there are not intermediate cases that ought to be unified, and
> >without definite criteria, it's hard to know what to do.
> Just grok them? :-)
Nope, won't work.
> >Disunification of whole scripts (using that word without prejudice)
I meant non-unification.
> When we get to encoding Samaritan, I guess the proposal will stand by
> itself or not.
Not if there are no criteria to judge it on that are better than "See, it's
-- John Cowan firstname.lastname@example.org http://www.ccil.org/~cowan Does anybody want any flotsam? / I've gotsam. Does anybody want any jetsam? / I can getsam. --Ogden Nash, _No Doctors Today, Thank You_
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Jul 15 2003 - 12:57:43 EDT