Re: Pigpen/Masonic/Poundex

From: Chris Jacobs (
Date: Fri Aug 08 2003 - 12:49:20 EDT

  • Next message: Stefan Persson: "Re: Newbie Question - what are all those duplicated characters FOR?"

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "John Cowan" <>
    To: "Chris Jacobs" <>
    Cc: <>
    Sent: Friday, August 08, 2003 6:22 AM
    Subject: Re: Pigpen/Masonic/Poundex

    > Chris Jacobs scripsit:
    > > 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.
    > *shrug*
    > There are lots of ways to do it, but no compelling need for
    > standardization.

    There is no need for unicoded pigpen. However, If you _did_ want to do
    pigpen in unicode you _would_ need to standardise it.

    This seems to be a clear difference from colorful scripts, where I think
    there is an agreement about which glyph represents which sound.

    So I think the analogy between pigpen and colorful scripts does not hold.

    > --
    > "No, John. I want formats that are actually John Cowan
    > useful, rather than over-featured megaliths that
    > address all questions by piling on ridiculous
    > internal links in forms which are hideously
    > over-complex." --Simon St. Laurent on xml-dev

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Aug 08 2003 - 13:41:49 EDT