At 11:11 -0700 2004-04-29, John Hudson wrote:
Peter, using a systematic transliteration between two structurally identical scripts is not comparable to hack encodings.
Vide Nuskhuri and Mkhedruli. Come on, gents. Don't try to tell me that I don't know the difference between a unifiable and a non-unifiable script. We did a pretty good roundup on what should be subsumed under Phoenician script, and NO it is NOT just a 1:1 relationship of structurally identical scripts. You can't shoebox everything into a couple of mindless rules.
The place the scripts have in history, their relevant descendants and antecedants, their letterforms, all of that has a bearing in identifying what is a unique script and what is not.
It is reasonable to set a German restaurant menu with "Bratwurst mit Senf" written in Fraktur, or an Irish restaurant menu with "Bag�n agus cab�iste" written in Gaelic type, and expect people to be able to read it. (S�tterlin is a hard style of Fraktur, with which people under 50 are mostly unfamiliar, but it is not a different script, and its ductus isn't even all that bizarre if you know about Fraktur.
It is not reasonable to set a Georgian restaurant menu in Nuskhuri script. It is not reasonable to set a Hebrew restaurant menu in Phoenician script. -- Michael Everson * * Everson Typography * * http://www.evertype.com
