From: Peter Kirk (email@example.com)
Date: Thu Aug 07 2003 - 15:55:03 EDT
On 07/08/2003 10:38, John Cowan wrote:
>Miikka-Markus Alhonen scripsit:
>>Anyone interested in preparing an encoding proposal?
>This is awfully marginal, it seems to me, not so much because of the colors
>(which are letter features, like crossbars, bowls, etc. in other scripts),
>but because except for "gb" (which is effectively a single grapheme,
>"g" being otherwise unused), this looks very much like an encipherment
>of the Latin-based orthography.
>The pigpen/Masonic cipher (see
>http://www.gchq.gov.uk/codebreaking/answers3.html for one common variant
>-- there are many) is analogous, though suited to English rather than Edo.
Is it a principle of Unicode that a new script should not be encoded
because it is one to one correspondence with an existing one, even
though there is no graphical relationship? Well, that is certainly in
conflict with Michael's comments about Aramaic, Samaritan etc.
-- Peter Kirk firstname.lastname@example.org (personal) email@example.com (work) http://www.qaya.org/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Aug 07 2003 - 16:35:48 EDT