Re: New contribution

From: John Hudson (
Date: Tue May 04 2004 - 13:23:37 CDT

Christian Cooke wrote:

> Surely a cipher is by definition "after the event", i.e. there must be
> the parent script before the child. Does it not follow that, by John's
> reasoning, if one is no more than a cipher of the other then it is
> Hebrew that is the cipher and so the only way Phoenician and Hebrew can
> be unified (a suggestion you'll have to assume is suitably showered with
> smileys :-) is for the latter to be deprecated and the former encoded as
> the /real/ parent script?

The argument of at least some contributors to this discussion is that the "Hebrew' block
is misnamed. Even if one accepts that 'Phoenician' should be separately encoded, the
Hebrew block should have been called 'Aramaic' :)

John Hudson

Tiro Typeworks
Vancouver, BC
I often play against man, God says, but it is he who wants
   to lose, the idiot, and it is I who want him to win.
And I succeed sometimes
In making him win.
              - Charles Peguy

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri May 07 2004 - 18:45:25 CDT