Re: Revised X-Sampa revision (was [several other things])

Merhaba!

BPJ wrote:

"The idea of a ASCII phonetic notation that takes into account the needs of
the sight-impaired is IMHO worth encouraging, but why don't you use e.g. _m_
and _n_ with their traditional values?"

I use /b~/ for /m/, /z~/ for /n/ etc. for several reasons:
They are logically derived from their oral counterparts.
The system is symmetrical: why have /g~/ for /N/ but not /b~/ for /m/? (But
this is because of the limited number of symbols in the Latin alphabet.)
If I used /m/ and /n/, then I would need extra diacritics for voicelessness
and (for /n/) dentalness (I would have an alveolar nasal but not a dental
one).
Symbols are saved for other phonemes.

--Trebor