> [Original Message]
> From: Chris Jacobs <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> ----- Original Message -----
> From: "Christopher Fynn" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
> > Is there any plan to include sets of shorthand (Pitman, Gregg etc.)
> > symbols in Unicode? Or are they something which is specifically
excluded?
>
> I don't know if it is excluded. A reason to exclude it would be if it
were a cipher
> of something already in.
>
> The only set of shorthand I know something of, dutch Groote, follows the
> pronunciation of the words rather than the spelling.
>
> Can shorthand be seen as a cipher of IPA ?
Gregg and Pitman both include some characters that serve for both a
voiced and an unvoiced consonant, so those systems at least can't be
seen as simple ciphers of IPA. It they were encoded, I think they would
belong on the SMP in the Notational Systems range of
U+1D000-U+1FFFD, and Gregg would be very complex to implement
because of the complex shaping rules it has. (Complex from the POV
of a line of type that is.) I don't know enough about Pitman or other
shorthands to comment on how hard it would be to implement them.
