Re: Fixing Two Unicode Asymmetries in case conversion

From: John Cowan (cowan@locke.ccil.org)
Date: Mon Nov 16 1998 - 10:37:25 EST


Timothy Partridge wrote:

> 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.
>
> For example:
> U+0259 LATIN SMALL LETTER SCHWA U+018F LATIN CAPITAL LETTER SCHWA

Certainly. But in that case it is not IPA but some natural language.
When I say IPA, I don't mean characters from the IPA Extensions block,
but rather text in the International Phonetic Alphabet. IPA is
unified with Latin in Unicode for pragmatic reasons, but it's really a
separate script, because it doesn't have the Latin/Greek/Cyrillic
concept of case.

-- 
John Cowan	http://www.ccil.org/~cowan		cowan@ccil.org
	You tollerday donsk?  N.  You tolkatiff scowegian?  Nn.
	You spigotty anglease?  Nnn.  You phonio saxo?  Nnnn.
		Clear all so!  'Tis a Jute.... (Finnegans Wake 16.5)



This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:43 EDT