From: Peter Kirk (peterkirk@qaya.org)
Date: Wed May 26 2004 - 16:44:14 CDT
On 26/05/2004 13:37, Peter Constable wrote:
> ...
>
>>If we can all agree that legibility is not a sufficient criterion on
>>
>>
>its
>
>
>>own for encoding Phoenician and Palaeo-Hebrew separately, then let's
>>indeed move on and see if there are any other technical arguments for
>>separate encoding. I don't remember seeing any.
>>
>>
>
>Saying that legibility is not a sufficient criterion does not imply that
>it is irrelevant or non technical. The *only* conclusion we can make
>from the preceding is that there is no reason whatsoever to continue
>discussing Fraktur when what we are really trying to make decisions on
>is PH. And, since legibility is a technical criterion (non-sufficient,
>but still a necessary consideration), even if there are no *other*
>reasons, your conclusion
>
>
>
>>This seems to suggest to
>>me that there is no technical justification for the proposal.
>>
>>
>
>is invalid. For that reason, and because I believe others have provided
>additional technical reasons, my own response to the question
>
>
>
>>Can we agree on that?
>>
>>
>
>is "no".
>
>
>
OK, can we agree that there is "non-sufficient" technical justification?
Presumably not, because:
>... there
>are technical issues that the pro-unification camp has not yet, that
>I've noticed, responded to after repeated requests. ...
>
Well, what are these technical issues? The only technical issue
concerning which there have been "repeated requests", at least since the
early stages of this thread which I may have forgotten, has been the
issue of legibility. I honestly don't remember any others, except for a
couple of irrelevant points such as that Phoenician is not usually
written with Hebrew accents. Well, maybe not everyone agrees that this
is irrelevant, but there certainly have not been "repeated requests"
about it at least in the last couple of weeks.
-- Peter Kirk peter@qaya.org (personal) peterkirk@qaya.org (work) http://www.qaya.org/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed May 26 2004 - 16:44:50 CDT