Michael Everson wrote at 4:54 PM on Monday, January 19, 2004:
No, we do not need to rehearse the pros and cons of the "dynamic" model for Cuneiform already. Abundant evidence for why it has not been chosen has already been presented.
But NO ONE mentioned free variation selectors in the discussion until yesterday.
But it's not MAGIC, Dean. Whether it's one of the "base signs plus productive modifiers" you cooked up in December, or whether it's viramas, or zero-width joiners, or variation selectors, all of those are just neutral characters to which some sort of behaviour is ascribed.
The point is that the use of such characters to "dynamically" or "productively" produce Cuneiform characters has been rejected as an encoding model for Cuneiform.
--
Michael Everson * * Everson Typography * * http://www.evertype.com
