02-06-2017, 02:19 AM
(This post was last modified: 02-06-2017, 02:23 AM by ThomasCoon.)
(01-06-2017, 11:11 PM)Koen Gh. wrote: You are not allowed to view links. Register or Login to view.I like any approach that tries to look for connections between glyphs and word structure and such. But I personally feel that the next step you propose is implausible.
One problem I see is that there would be ambiguities if any glyph can be dropped, to produce a 0 in the implicit binary code. Consider a word 1234. How do we know that those four glyphs belong to the same set? Might it be 123 without 4, followed by a 4 without 123? Or may 3412 have been dropped between 2 and 3?
So if I understand it correctly, a Voynich word 1234 may represent one, two or three plain text letters?
I think this problem can be solved by spacing: if the encoder wants to separate "1" and "2" from "12", he can put a space between them.
Again I could be completely wrong about everything
