"longgren" (name?) has started a healthy discussion here :)

>>> Why is this so complicated?
>>> Why not just use dh for the "th" in English "that"
>>> th for the "th" in English "think"
>>> ae for the vowel
>>> * for umlauts (2 dots over a letter)

Well, try to see it from our view-point: if you were teaching English
to some people who didn't (for some reason) have "c" and "q" on their
keyboards, and had trouble getting them right on their screen, would
you be willing to, in the long run, work with an alternate written
version of your language which you'd both find difficult and
distressing to look at, let alone read?

It is, IMHO, not in the best interest of any student sincerely
interested in reading ON text material, to first adapt to one
graphical form of the language (special characters replaced), and
then deal with a different form (the "real" one).

Haukur wrote:

>>I spot five mistakes in your typing.

Quite beside the point, of course; we should give the fellow a
break :) ("knífr í bak!". Don't mind, that's personal humor between
me and Haukur.)

>I have Web TV, not a computer, so if I want to type something in Old

Norse I can only use the characters I have. I think everyone knows
what th and dh mean. The only difficult one is * for the umlaut or 2
dots on top

I have finally gained perspective in this matter, which reaches much
farther back than the recent posts from "longgren".

We (me and Haukur) have mostly, in our use of computers through the
years, restricted ourselves (rather unimaginatively) to MS products.
I am finding that the various alternatives, employed by list members
here, are beyond my scope as of today. I should try to learn more
about the different possibilities in using computers, and open up my
mind towards them. I am, for example, afflicted with an "anti-Mac
bias" (no offence to Mac-users), a rather chronic one :)

The truth is, Haukur and me don't know enough about the many ways in
which people find themselves unable to enjoy our work, because of
their computer systems being different from ours. I do accept, as
part of our contribution, to make our work accessible for the
majority.

However, we can't solve all such problems. We barely have enough time
and energy to write the material for the course itself. This course
isn't our job. Nobody's paying us for it (at least not yet). So I'm
sorry to say that we are, flat out, unable to make our material
available to the whole spectrum of digital-equipment-users,
especially not the "outer" ends of the spectrum, such as users of
Unix, Linux, Palm Pilots, Web TVs, WAP phones, etc.

No, I'm afraid that the users of "non-standard" equipment will each
have to find solutions of their own to this problem. I believe they
are, in most cases, used to being in that situation. That is the cost
of using non-standard equipment, regardless of the equipment's other
merits.

I hope nobody will resent me for taking this position. It should be
remembered, as I stated above, that this course is the result of our
work done in our spare time. We want to contribute. If anybody can
help us contribute, by solving this particular problem, someone with
more knowledge of the different standards in computers (there seem to
be many candidates), then I would be very grateful for any help from
those parties :)

Óskar