[Egyptian] Repeating operators

[Bob Richmond]

Hi Mark-Jan



Just to say I enjoy reading your papers. Even when I view the argument as a reductio ad absurdum. Or the tourist seeking their way to Dublin. However I’m also the kind of sad individual who sometime freeze-frames on the ‘Big Bang Theory’ to look for errors in the equations. Don’t tell anyone ??.



So I’d like to endorse Nigels plea for less technobabble. I fear some Egyptologists here have been somewhat blinded by ‘science’.



Regards,

Bob











From: Mark-Jan Nederhof<mailto:mn31 at st-andrews.ac.uk>
Sent: 05 August 2016 09:29
To: egyptian at evertype.com<mailto:egyptian at evertype.com>
Subject: Re: [Egyptian] Repeating operators



Sorry, I should have said these specs were intended for the few techies among us only.
I can try to rephrase it in non-technical terms, but not before I get back from
a conference trip. Alternatively what is in this document is a worked-out idea in
Section 9 of the previous document, which is (slightly) more readable.

If that makes any difference: the specs pertain to syntax, and not (very much) about
expressive power in terms of being able to encode certain groups.

Mark-Jan

On Friday 05 Aug 2016 09:03:48 Nigel Strudwick wrote:
> 1. Is it possible to have an explanation of this system not intended for specialists? I have tried to read these reports and I do not understand a word. Or were there some diagrams I have missed?
>
> 2. I feel Ptolemaic hieroglyphs should be completely omitted from this system as they are a total "niche market”. As I recall in Cambridge, we agreed we would concentrate on the basic set of characters and minimise extensions to it. Do remember that the hieroglyphica extended set was only really developed for the IFAO producing typeset texts of Ptolemaic inscriptions.
>
> Nigel
>
>
> On 5 Aug 2016, at 00:50, Mark-Jan Nederhof <mn31 at st-andrews.ac.uk> wrote:
>
> > On Thursday 04 Aug 2016 21:06:52 Serge Rosmorduc wrote:
> >> On a practical level, due to the size of the gap, it’s also the one where the lack of a proper mechanism hurts most. I guess using
> >> PastedGraphic-4.pdf
> >>
> >> instead of
> >> PastedGraphic-5.pdf
> >>
> >> does not hurt scholars sensitivity as much as
> >> [...]
> >
> > I see what you mean with 4 and 5.
> >
> > But have you considered the raised arms (kA) ? Lots of groups can be put within the raised arms.
> > If  a horizontal group, or even a vertical group is being inserted, and one wants to do this using
> > vertical grouping + JOIN, there is no guarantee the result will be close to what one expects
> > (the group being actually inside the bounding box of the raised arms). For me, it feels
> > right to fit the Hm sign inside kA using VERT+JOIN, which might well 'stick out' above.
> > But not say the 't', which one expects properly inside, and which moreover is being read
> > phonetically after the kA (if that means anything).
> >
> > This is why I think we should reconsider using insert-inside for such cases. Then also the cobra
> > could be seen in a new light.
> >
> > For the syntax without brackets, see attachment. I'm not sure that for simple machinery this is any easier
> > to process than a bounded number of bracket nestings. Note there are 12 binding values hidden in this
> > model.
> >
> > I have left open the exact notation for operator precedence. I see at least four possibilities, as listed in the
> > document.
> >
> > Mark-Jan
> > <paper.pdf>_______________________________________________
> > Egyptian mailing list
> > Egyptian at evertype.com
> > http://evertype.com/mailman/listinfo/egyptian_evertype.com
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> Egyptian mailing list
> Egyptian at evertype.com
> http://evertype.com/mailman/listinfo/egyptian_evertype.com


_______________________________________________
Egyptian mailing list
Egyptian at evertype.com
http://evertype.com/mailman/listinfo/egyptian_evertype.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://evertype.com/pipermail/egyptian_evertype.com/attachments/20160805/52e1b71a/attachment.htm>