Re: About "features" RE: Hangul script type: (was Re: [OT] ANN: Si

From: Lars Marius Garshol
Message: 541
Date: 2001-11-11

* william bright
|
| in all the discussion of "featural" systems, i find it strange that
| there is so little mention of pitman shorthand or gregg shorthand,
| which were once used daily by thousands of people.

For my part this is mainly because I haven't looked at those systems
very closely yet. It does seem to make sense to include them, but I am
incapable at this point to say anything sensible about them.

| both these systems were partly "featural", pitman i think more than
| gregg.

Why were they only partly featural? What about them is it that makes
them fail to be featural?

--Lars M.

Previous in thread: 508
Next in thread: 542
Previous message: 540
Next message: 542

Contemporaneous posts     Posts in thread     all posts