[Spellyans] SWF (t) and Maga web site

Michael Everson everson at evertype.com
Thu Aug 9 10:45:44 IST 2012

On 9 Aug 2012, at 08:34, Lowe Jenefer wrote:

> The choice has always been with the individual and outside official use and education we work with all orthographies and are happy to explain the various systems of spelling – in fact I thought we had a page on that already.

In offering only an SWF/K dictionary MAGA is basically not offering those who prefer traditional graphs an option. A paragraph in the front matter telling people that when they want to find "cath" they can look under "K" is not sufficient. 

> The point with the SWF is to provide a neutral spelling for official use.

Then why publish a dictionary at all? You might keep it in-house for "official use". 

> What I am not prepared to do is make unilateral decisions about the SWF that go against the agreement and spec, as that would open the door for everyone on all sides to do the same.

You published both an SWF/K and an SWF/T version of the glossary. You should do the same with the dictionary.

If you're not willing to do that, I am. Make the files available to me and I will emend them as necessary and publish the SWF/T dictionary. Then MAGA won't be seen "making unilateral decisions about the SWF", if I understand rightly what you mean by that. 

Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/

More information about the Spellyans mailing list