[Spellyans] Partnership Meeting and SWF Review

Michael Everson everson at evertype.com
Tue Mar 13 17:47:48 GMT 2012

On 13 Mar 2012, at 17:41, Janice Lobb wrote:

> The idea, surely, of having "active" users is to have people who have been trying to use SWF and encountering problems which need to be addressed.

We certainly encountered them while preparing the SWF/T and SWF/K versions of Skeul an Tavas. 

> It doesn't necessarily mean whole hearted supporters of SWF.

The "compromise orthography" per se is such a leaky ship that we simply couldn't use it for literature. There is much right with it, but also much that is confusing and self-contradictory which needs to be put right. 

> Anyone who has just been sitting back and hoping that it will go away wouldn't be so on the ball. Nothing sinister that I can see. You and Nicholas probably know its short-comings better than anyone.

Perhaps. Certainly we know the phonotactic requirements of Cornish better than anyone. (One learns this sort of thing when working out how to spell all the words and names in the Bible!)

> Just make sure that when the questionnaire comes round you put yourselves down as "users" in some capacity or other! The Review Board will have to consult all groups anyway.

But THAT is the question, Jan. Who will be on the Review Board? Who will collate the questionnaires? Who will decide which "problems" are problems and which are not? Who will decide which solutions are good ones and which are bad?

The AHG was gerrymandered to prevent certain experts from participating. The result was an unsatisfactory compromise orthography. Now we begin negotiations about its review and alteration -- and we see what appears to be more gerrymandering.

This bodes ill for any notion of "partnership". 

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

More information about the Spellyans mailing list