On 03/09/2017 01:42, Victor Chan wrote:
> In 2017 August 11, I had proposed a systematic method to distinguish
>  Chinese homophones in writing by indicating its meaning as well. I 
> now decide to propose a reform of pinyin

That brings back memories.  :)

There was/were longish thread(s) about this in the early months of 2000.
  Looking in the archives, it seems to have gun in February of that year
and drifted on at least into May.  I remember taking part in it.  Y

> 1) <x, j, q> signify an allophone so it can be replaced with <s, z, 
> c>.

Very true. But are thsse allophones of the denti-alveolar series <s, z,
c>, as you state, or of the (post-alveolar) retroflex series <sh, zh,
ch> or the velar series <h, g, k>, or of all three, since the palatals,
as you observe below, are found only before [i] and [y] and the glides
[j] and [ɥ] whereas neither the dentals, nor the alveopalatals nor the
velars may occur before those sounds?

This is a controversial point and IIRC was discussed in the thread I
regerred to, as indeed were the phonemic status of the various high
vowels and glides, including "syllabic r"  - for the latter, cf:

But I'll say no more - but start looking for what I suggested back then.  :)