Yes, of course that is what I meant. Sorry if anyone was confused.
In a message dated 2001-10-11 8:55:22 Pacific Daylight Time, rick@unicode.org
writes:
> Doug Ewell wrote...
>
> > Cyrillic was created as a better way to write Slavic languages, Russian
in
> > particular. Shavian and Deseret were created as better ways to write
> > English. The former met with overwhelming success, the latter did not
>
> It's usual to bind "former" and "latter" to the closest preceeding pair of
> items, which led me to think you were talking of Shavian versus Deseret,
> and that was moderately confusing. Shavian certainly can't be counted an
> overwhelming success when compared to Deseret...
>
> In case anyone else is boggled... "Former" actually refers to Cyrillic and
> "latter" to Shavian and Deseret together.
-Doug Ewell
Fullerton, California
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Thu Oct 11 2001 - 22:16:12 EDT