<!DOCTYPE html PUBLIC "-//W3C//DTD HTML 4.01 Transitional//EN">
<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html;charset=ISO-8859-1">
<title></title>
</head>
<body text="#000000" bgcolor="#ffffff">
Val,<br>
<br>
It's not necessary for a new symbol Val. The simplicity and
unambiguity of the current Eyes Open symbol makes them preferable. I
was curious more about the history. Did you start out with oval eyes?<br>
<br>
Bill<br>
<br>
<br>
Valerie Sutton wrote:<br>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="midd3e028f4636cc1ea9db91f5be637ff3c@signwriting.org">SignWriting
List
<br>
May 5, 2005
<br>
<br>
Bill Reese wrote:
<br>
<blockquote>This had me wondering why not an oval for a normally
opened
eye. I rewrote Lucinda's symbol with that idea.
<br>
</blockquote>
<br>
That would add another symbol to the IMWA, Bill...do you think it is
really necessary? The first one in the attached diagram is really Eyes
Open...the word Open is missing. Where would you put your oval eyes?...
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<br>
<hr width="90%" size="4"><br>
<center><img src="cid:part1.06000308.08010805@tampabay.rr.com"></center>
<p><br>
<br>
<br>
</p>
</blockquote>
</body>
</html>