Re: Number of writing systems

--- In qalam@yahoogroups.com, Michael Everson <everson@...> wrote:

> At 08:50 -0400 2005-09-18, Peter T. Daniels wrote:
>
> > > >Plus, of course, the "abjad/abugida" fiasco at the Unicode

glossary.

> > >
> > > I did not write the definitions in The Unicode Standard 3.0,

and we

> > > greatly revised the definitions when The Unicode Standard 4.0

was

> > > published, in response to your criticism.
> >
> >You doggedly defended them as if you were responsible for them.
>
> No, I did not; you are mistaken. I promptly submitted each of the
> definitions here on this list for discussion and revision, and later
> submitted the revised definition to the Book Committee.

Michael, I seem to be having some difficultiy tracking the latest
version of Unicode. I just read version 4.0 but it lumps together in
Table 6-1 Ethiopic, Canadian Aboriginal Syllabics and Hangul
as 'Featural Syllabaries' - is that intended to stand?

And is there some reason why for CAS, 'the relationship of sound and
graphic parts is less systematic' than for Hangul?

I'm sorry but I seem to get mixed up between version 4.0, 4.0.1 and
version 4.1.0. The links seem to go round and round.

There are a number of other oddities, so if I have quoted an outdated
version, please guide me to something more current. I apologize if
this was explained earlier, maybe last summer.

Suzanne