I guess the point of codifying existing handwritten forms is probably true for the Chinese simplified characters also? Many of the simplifications were made by taking a cursive form and declaring it the "official" version.
Like I said, in China primary motivator was improving literacy rate.
The number of simplified characters (3500 out of 7000) closely matches the number of characters necessary for almost-full literacy (most common 3500 characters cover about 99.5% of everyday written language).
> Many of the simplifications were made by taking a cursive form and declaring it the "official" version.
Wrong. While many simplified characters were modeled after their cursive forms, it's not simply taking these cursive forms and declared them "official". Per se, the cursive form is cursive, and the simplified characters are in regular script. The problem is, when you forcibly bend the curves into straight lines, many lost their artistic aspects and became ugly abominations.
> Like I said, in China primary motivator was improving literacy rate.
The funny thing: Taiwan uses the traditional set and has a higher literacy rate than China. People used to blame the traditional characters as too complicated and a hinderance to literacy. Apparently what really matters at all is the education itself.
Why are the cursive forms invented in the first place? Are they only artistic? They got their use in real life as well. People are lazy and always in a hurry.