From: Mark E. Shoulson (email@example.com)
Date: Thu Jun 10 2004 - 10:07:34 CDT
Peter Constable wrote:
>>From: firstname.lastname@example.org [mailto:email@example.com]
>>Behalf Of John Cowan
>> [T]he Unicode Standard does not encode idiosyncratic,
>> personal, novel, or private use characters [...].
>What about Bell's Visible Speech? (I'm sure I've seen it discussed here
>on on qalam, but I've no recollection what might have been said.) I
>don't know what Bell might have published, but they were also used by
>Sweet, Henry. 1906. A primer of phonetics. 3rd edn., revised. Oxford:
>Would you consider these too idiosyncratic?
I hope not. IMO Visible Speech *definitely* deserves encoding in Plane
1. Bell used it some, and I have several articles by Sweet in which he
used it, and I even managed to find an article by someone else using
Visible Speech. Everything is a novel invention once; the question is
whether it has a life (or at least a significance) beyond its inventor.
(cf. Shavian, which probably was used not more than, and likely less
than, Visible Speech). In fact, in the movie of My Fair Lady, Visible
Speech is, in fact, well, visible in Henry Higgins' notebook.
I have a font (my own), and proposal for VS is languishing on my hard
drive; it should someday be finished up and submitted.
(owner of visiblespeech.info, which someday, I hope, will actually have
useful VS information on it)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jun 10 2004 - 10:08:35 CDT