unicode@Unicode.ORG writes:
> If Latin was encoded with the same regard that is given to Devanagari,
> then there would be no A acute character, it would have to be entered
> as <A> + <acute sign>. What glyphs are to be rendered are as easily
> deduced from the character encoding as is anything in Devanagari. And,
> I believe, the way A acute is entered into a tool like TeX is
> as \'A -- essentially, a two-character encoding. Instead, Unicode 1.0
> has a glyph encoding for all of the letters modified with the acute,
> grave, circumflex, etc. etc. signs.
Well, this is a quite culturally biased view on the <a'>.
In some languages the <a'> is a indivisable letter, having its
own primary sorting place in the alphabet, this is the case for
Icelandic. I think you mainly had English in your mind.
Also there exists keyboards with the <a'> as a separate key.
How things are done in TeX could also have a heavy (English)
cultural bias. For example in troff you could enter letters
like <a'> as a single letter.
Keld
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:33 EDT