Michael Everson responded to Christopher Fynn's question:
At 13:46 +0100 2004-09-19, Christopher Fynn wrote:> > >So, am I right in assuming that were someone put together a decent > >proposal for one or more shorthand scripts, there is no particular > >reason in principle why it would be rejected? > > You are right.
There is also no particular reason why it would be accepted. For any such proposal there needs to be a case made for why the shorthand should be encoded as Unicode characters.
You are also right.
Chinook Wawa comes to mind though. And Sweet's phonetic shorthand has some importance.
In any case, I consider Unicode encoding of shorthands to be a very low priority, compared to the effort needed for some well-known minority and historic scripts which are still unencoded.
Hear, hear. -- Michael Everson * * Everson Typography * * http://www.evertype.com
