> Script typology isn't primarily for "encoders." It's mostly for

(and

> by) scholars of writing systems. Modern character coding systems

do

> generally try to encode a script according to its inherent

structure,

> though.

So Cree and Tamil have some similarity in the way they are coded?

If encoders think they have a system, why shouldn't those working
on, or trying to choose, input methods have a system?

>
> > Right now Tamil is coded to keyboard in order of phonetic

sequence

> > (alphabet?), edits as syllables (syllabic?)(there also exists a
> > syllable input IME version 1 - not really working yet), and

displays

> > in non-linear sequence (abugida?).
>
> You think the fact that Tamil displays in non-linear sequence is

what

> makes it an abugida?

No, non-linear sequence somehow distinguishes it from an alphabet. I
don't think there is terminology adequate for this yet. Tamil and
Cree can be analysed below the syllable level but very differently.

Suzanne McCarthy

P.S. Do you remember the discussion with Peter Constable November
2001? I think he was trying to say something very similar to what I
am saying.

Suzanne MCarthy

> -Doug Ewell
> Fullerton, California
> http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/