John Cowan wrote:
> There are 139 lower-case letters in Unicode 2.1 that have no direct
> uppercase equivalent. Should there be introduced new bogus characters
> for all of them, so that when you see an "fl" ligature you can upcase
> it to "FL" without expanding anything? Of course not.
> Note that case conversion is inherently language-sensitive, notably in the
> case of IPA, which needs to be left strictly alone even when embedded
> in another language which is being case converted. The best you can
> get is an approximate fit.
I agree that if in an English dictionary the IPA shouldn't be uppercased,
but I thought that some of the IPA letters were used as letters in some
African languages, and did have upper case equivalents.
U+0259 LATIN SMALL LETTER SCHWA U+018F LATIN CAPITAL LETTER SCHWA
except of course for Nigerian
U+01DD LATIN SMALL LETTER TURNED E U+018E LATIN CAPITAL LETTER REVERSED E
Presumably there is no mixed-language legacy data with schwas in, and the
user community won't get confused!
-- Tim Partridge. Any opinions expressed are mine only and not those of my employer
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:43 EDT