[Egyptian] Repeating operators

[John Baines]

I haven't commented on this thread before because I am ignorant of the technical issues. 

I think it will be wise to allow in overall plans for any extra complications that may be posed by Graeco-Roman period hieroglyphic texts. At a guess they make up perhaps a fifth to a quarter of total published hieroglyphic texts (probably more of those published in typeset hieroglyphs). At present they have fewer specialists than people who work on earlier periods, but that could always change, and the period has a wider range of interested parties (classicists, ancient historians, etc.). Probably they do not go far beyond Ramessid monumental inscriptions in the ways in which they stack and combine signs, but of course their sign repertory (which I take not to be the main point here) is much larger.

John


-----Original Message-----
From: Egyptian [mailto:egyptian-bounces at evertype.com] On Behalf Of Nigel Strudwick
Sent: 05 August 2016 12:13
To: Egyptian Hieroglyphs in the UCS <egyptian at evertype.com>
Subject: Re: [Egyptian] Repeating operators

I certainly have been. Thanks Bob. I also cannot conceive of how these codes work in practice, since when I type (say) Option e e, I get é which is a discrete character in a font and not a combination of two others.

I would be interested in comments on my somewhat less uninformed thoughts about Ptolemaic signs.

N



On 5 Aug 2016, at 12:04, Bob Richmond <bobqq at live.co.uk> wrote:

> 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
> Sent: 05 August 2016 09:29
> To: 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
> _______________________________________________
> 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