At 19:56 -0400 2003-08-01, John Cowan wrote:
>Lars Marius Garshol scripsit:
>> What do you mean by this? That if we ignore how tones are written the
>> script is an alphabet, but if we do consider the tones it has to be
>> considered to belong to some other type? Or something else entirely?
>The key point here is that the relative positions of certain letters
>encodes something, which is certainly not typical of an alphabet.

Why not? It's a shape.
Michael Everson * * Everson Typography * *