Dominikus Scherkl (MGW) wrote at 6:31 PM on Tuesday, May 25, 2004: >> There are tests and there are tests. >That realy was a _very_ hard test - fraktur was never >designed for capitalized layout. >Noone can read this well - and I do often read texts >in fraktur. > >Was your argument that what is proposed as Phoenician >letters need to be "translitterated" to be read at all?
No, the argument is that since others are using the claimed illegibility of Palaeo-Hebrew for modern Hebrew readers to justify a Phoenician encoding, they should be consistent and apply the same reasoning for separately encoding Fraktur capitals (all the more because modern Fraktur has greater potential for more living users than does Palaeo-Hebrew). The fact that you and others claim this is a really hard test proves the point - the illegibility argument should be applied more judiciously than it has been here. For reasons similar to why I would be against separately encoded Fraktur abstract letters I am currently against separately encoded Phoenician, that is until some OTHER reason(s) more compelling than those I've seen so far are provided. Respectfully, Dean A. Snyder Assistant Research Scholar Manager, Digital Hammurabi Project Computer Science Department Whiting School of Engineering 218C New Engineering Building 3400 North Charles Street Johns Hopkins University Baltimore, Maryland, USA 21218 office: 410 516-6850 cell: 717 817-4897 www.jhu.edu/digitalhammurabi
