Standaridized variation sequences for the Desert alphabet?

[Martin J. Dürst]

On 2017/03/23 22:48, Michael Everson wrote:

> Indeed I would say to John Jenkins and Ken Beesley that the richness of the history of the Deseret alphabet would be impoverished by treating the 1859 letters as identical to the 1855 letters.

Well, I might be completely wrong, but John Jenkins may be the person on 
this list closest to an actual user of Deseret (John, please correct me 
if I'm wrong one way or another).

It may be that actual users of Deseret read these character variants the 
same way most of us would read serif vs. sans-serif variants: I.e. 
unless we are designers or typographers, we don't actually consciously 
notice the difference. If that's the case, it would be utterly annoying 
to these actual users to have to make a distinction between two 
characters where there actually is none.

The richness of the history of the Deseret alphabet can still be 
preserved e.g. with different fonts the same way we have thousands of 
different fonts for Latin and many other scripts that show a lot of rich 
history.

Regards,   Martin.