FluxScript | Comparative Analysis

Summary:

I am by no means a linguist, or stenographer, and do not expect FluxScript to become a professional standard. I do hope, however, to share this unique approach to stenography as an alternative for the casual note-taker (like me), and as a creative example for future stenographic systems.

FluxScript's main advantage is its structured reading order, its lack of ambiguity, and its unique medium/learning preference. Pitman, Gregg, Handywrite, Teeline, and alphabetic shorthand systems are much more widely tested than FluxScript, but based on strokes per phoneme, and required accuracy of strokes, FluxScript will likely not reach quite as high of speeds as the alternative systems.

Name	FluxScript	Handywrite	Gregg	Pitman	Teeline	Alphabetic
Spelling	Phonetic, full/short	Phonetic, full/short	Semi-phonetic, short	Phonetic, short	Phonetic, short	Semi-traditional
Characters	cursive, curves only	cursive, sharp edges	cursive, sharp edges, diacritical vowels	cursive, sharp edges, diacritical vowels	Mixed cursive	traditional cursive
Letter order	Left to right	Top left to down/right/up	Top left to down/right/up	Left to right, diacritics	Top left to down/right	Left to right
Upper WPM	Unattested 70+?	90+	160+	160+	120+	100+
Long term ambiguity	Minimal; homophones only	Minimal; homophones only	High; word outlines	High; word outlines	High; word outlines	High; word outlines
Letter Differentiation	Moderate	Moderate	Moderate	Moderate	High	Highest
Acquisition Speed	Unattested; phonetic characters	Moderate; phonetic, situational letter forms	Slow; semi-phonetic, situational letter forms	Slower; shorthand vowel rules, phonetic	Fast; based on standard orthography	Fastest; familiar characters, shorthand
Mediums	Pen, lined paper	Pen, blank paper	Pen, blank paper	Fountain pen, lined paper	Pen, lined paper	Pen, (lined) paper, keyboard