From: Peter T. Daniels
Message: 1855
Date: 2003-12-12
>'Being encoded in Unicode' is most certainly not a reasonable definition
> At 02:16 -0800 2003-12-12, Sue Nudies down the Lane wrote:
> >Personally I think the count runs well over a hundred. Would you
> >include alternative spellings like Shavian, Qkwikscript, Unifon?
> >Shorthand systems? Alphabets created for gaming, constructed
> >languages, virtual worlds, etc?
>
> Writing systems are writing systems. Do you mean we would encode all
> of the above in Unicode?