Re: definition of plain text

On Sat, 15 Oct 2011 04:37:11 +0200
Peter Cyrus <pcyrus_at_alivox.net> wrote:

> Ken, your explanation seems more permissive than I had anticipated.

> One particularity of this script is that it is written in different
> "gaits", depending on the phonology of the language. Languages with
> open syllables, like most Niger-Congo or Austronesian languages, would
> write it as a syllabary. Languages with fixed syllables, like
> Chinese, Korean or Vietnamese, would write it as blocks, like Hangul.
> Languages with variable syllables, like most Indo-European languages,
> would write it as an alphabet. And Afro-Asiatic languages would write
> the vowels as diacritics to highlight the triliteral roots. But all
> these gaits would use the same underlying letters, and the same
> underlying Unicode PUA characters.

This reminds me of linearised Hangul. (Can that be encoded to
distinguish it from normal Hangul?). There is also an element of
Egyptian here, where I am not sure whether the idea of writing normal
text has been abandoned 'forever'. (Normal Egyptian text would require
something like Ideographic description characters, but with mandatory
composition.)

Taking a lead from Hangul, could this script be analysed in terms of
initial consonants, initial vowels, non-initial vowels, and final
consonants?

Richard.
Received on Sun Oct 16 2011 - 11:38:03 CDT