On Mon, Apr 20, 2009 at 5:26 PM, Mark J. Reed <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> CXS is just X-SAMPA with some changes, mostly made for aesthetic purposes.
> Therefore, none of them is a superset of another; they're all equivalent.

My understanding is that CXS is less ambiguous than X-SAMPA in some
corner cases of coarticulations.

> IPA lacks symbols for sounds that only occur due to pathology, or that
> don't occur at all in any known language, so it is definitely a subset
> of the possible phonetic systems.  There are some officially-accepted
> extensions of the IPA into that uncharted space; I don't know if there
> are X-SAMPA equivalents for them.

That'd be nice.

But given how some conlangers *do* use those 'white boxes' on the IPA
chart, we should probably support them somehow...

- Sai