From: Chris Jacobs (chris.jacobs@freeler.nl)
Date: Thu Aug 07 2003 - 23:02:43 EDT
----- Original Message -----
From: "John Cowan" <jcowan@reutershealth.com>
To: "Miikka-Markus Alhonen" <Miikka-Markus.Alhonen@tigatieto.com>
Cc: <unicode@unicode.org>
Sent: Thursday, August 07, 2003 7:38 PM
Subject: Re: Colourful scripts
> 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.
But how _do_ you code pigpen in unicode?
It is indeed clear that it should not be considered another alphabet but
just a font for the latin alphabet, and that it thusly should get no own
codepoints.
But you still need to pick one of the variants as the _plaintext_ (in
crypto sense) variant, and then you can deem the others to be crypted by
monoalphabetic substitution.
I think the variant used in FAM-Code.ttf is a good choice for the plaintext
variant.
http://www.odr.org/anonymous/fam-code.htm
> --
> All Norstrilians knew what laughter was: John Cowan
> it was "pleasurable corrigible malfunction".
http://www.reutershealth.com
> --Cordwainer Smith, _Norstrilia_ jcowan@reutershealth.com
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Aug 07 2003 - 23:41:47 EDT