Re: OT: Conorthography aesthetics (WAS: Re: Featural code based on ...
| From: | Tristan McLeay <zsau@...> |
|---|
| Date: | Wednesday, September 10, 2003, 13:26 |
|---|
On Wed, 10 Sep 2003, Christophe Grandsire wrote:
> En réponse à Andreas Johansson :
>
>
> >g0miileg0's orthography isn't among the most aesthetically appealing I've
> >seen, but beyond the use of "0" as a letter there's nothing much I actively
> >dislike. Pete's system, OTOH, includes stuff like _euohfv_, which makes French
> >look downright stunning by comparison.
>
> I remark nobody mentioned Maggel yet :))) . Or do people find its
> orthography actually beautiful? ;))))
Actually, you _note_ that no-one_'s_* mentioned Maggel yet :))) But how
can we judge Maggel's orthography when we've only seen the Roman
transliteration? (Or has there been some of the highly ligatured script
posted that I've forgotten about?)
*No-one for nobody is just a personal preference and does not indicate the
incorrectness of nobody.
--
Tristan <kesuari@...>
Yesterday I was a dog. Today I'm a dog. Tomorrow I'll probably still
be a dog. Sigh! There's so little hope for advancement.
-- Snoopy
Reply