It doesn’t matter that much to me. Latin u and i are still Latin u and i, whether you spell them as u and i or v and j.
I suspect that most things to be said have already been said, but I want to share this fabulous, very old papyrus I recently found out about:
http://www.papyrology.ox.ac.uk/POxy/VExhibition/millennium_docs/syneros_chius.html
(You can click on the little thumbnail to get a readable picture.)
This can be transcribed as follows (see this book):
suneros ·chio suo·plur·sal·s u b ·theo adduxsit·ad·me·ohapim
regium·mensularium·oxsyrychitem·qui quidem·mecum·est·locutus
de·inprobitate·epaphraes ·itaque·nihil·ultra·loquor·quam·[[no]]
ne patiarus·te·propter·illos·perire ·crede·mihi·nimia·bonitas
pernicies·homin_bus est \uel·maxsuma/ ·deinde·ipse·tibei·de·mostrabit
qut·rei·sit·qum·illum·adte·uocareis ·set·perseruera
qui·de·tampusilla·summa·tam·magnum·lucrum·facit
dominum·occidere·uolt ·deinde·ego·clamare·debeo·siquod·uideo
deuom·atque·hominum·[[fidem si tu·ista·non·cuibis]]
tuum·erit·uindicare·ne alio·libeat·facere
This is written in the Older Roman cursive, the same script as in the Vindolanda tablets. The letter that in monumental inscriptions would look like “V” is written rounded, usually with a little tail, exactly as our “u”. There is (of course) no distinction made between the consonant and the vowel.
Another thing to note is the dots used to divide words. And even though there are no other interpunctations, sentences are usually divided by greater spaces.
There are no apices here, as far as I can see._
That’s an interesting collection of docs, Alatius. Here it is on http://www.archive.org.
Ea collectio papyrorum mihi curae est, Alati. En apud http://www.archive.org.
http://www.archive.org/search.php?query=The%20Oxyrhynchus%20Papyri
ireallydonotseethepointofthisargumentsincethetruewayofwiritingduringalongtimewasthisanditsnotveryreadabletoanyone
Why should we write like the romans did? They’re dead. Latin was still kept alive during mediaeval times and the renaissance - it’s not less of latin just because it’s not during the golden age of the roman empire. Latin composed during the 19th century is just as much latin as Cicero’s writings.
To be honest: they did not even use the same alphabet as we do. Just look at it: the roman cursive handwriting is totally illegible for anyone that has not undergone extensive palaeographic training. I’m all in favour for releasing for publishing latin written in that way, just for fun, but I would not tell anyone to adopt that kind of handwriting because it would not be real latin unless they did.
How many would think german was not german unless written with the fracture or the very special handwriting employed alongside? Many before 1944. Same goes for many germanic languages, who used the fracture for long when romance languages had switched to the style with we use today. In text containing both latin and a germanic language, they switched between fracture and the antiqua as they switched languages. Today, that’s almost absurd to most of us.
·BUT·SURE·WE·COULD·WRITE·LATIN·LIKE·THIS·IF·WE·WOULD·WANT·TO·WRITE·LIKE·THE·ROMANS·DID·AND·ONLY·USE·WORDS·THAT·IS·IN·O·L·D·BUT·TO·BE·HONEST·HOW·ANNOYING·AND·STUPID·WOULD·THAT·NOT·BE·UNLESS·JUST·DONE·FOR·FUN·AND·WOULD·IT·REALLY·GIVE·ANYONE·ANYTHING·IF·WE·WROTE·IT·LIKE·THIS·HONESTLY·
I would say it’s very readable by everyone!
Omnibus facile lectu adusquè est, dico.
Nor is anyone saying that, Hampie. Possibly you misunderstand.
Nec ullus qui sic urget. Fortassè secús accipis.
-
Haha, it’s certainly harder than reading normally inter-punctuated text
. -
I think someone justified using the uir-spelling (as opposed to the vir-spelling) by means of that was they way latin was written or something alike. I don’t recall. It made sense when I wrote it. Anyhow, my point is, that it’s a pretty unnecessary thing to fight about. I myself use æ and œ whenever possible, alongside with j and v, and like when macrons are used.
QVOTHOMINESTOTSENTENTIÆ 
Yes. It is used for [j] and for [ʒ] and for [dʒ].
I strongly disagree with the argument that both > j > and > u > have equal merit. > u > is quite phonetically consistent across europe, so its case for inclusion has a greater weight.
This is incorrect. u is pronounced [uː] and [ʊ] and [y] and [ɨ] and [iː] and [ʌ] in Europe.