Re: missing Latin letter for transcription

From: John Cowan (
Date: Thu Mar 18 1999 - 12:06:38 EST

Arno Schmitt wrote:

> S/s followed by Combining Macron Below 0331 is fine.
> But what is the reason for having T/t with line below (1E6E, 1E6F)
> and not having the correspondent S/s with line below?

Rushing in where angels fear to tread:

The Latin-1 Supplement block (08xx) exists for code compatibility and
1-1 transcoding with Latin-1.

The Latin Extended A block (10xx) exists to provide 1-1 transcoding
with Latin-2, Latin-3, Latin-4, and Latin-5 only.

The Latin Extended B block (18xx) exists to provide 1-1 transcoding
with various other standards, including ISO 6438, GB 2312, JIS X 0202,
and Latin-10, and to provide capital-letter equivalents of IPA

The Latin Extended Additional block (1Exx) exists to provide 1-1
transcoding with VISCII, and to handle all the precomposed characters
that existed in the first draft 10646, before the merger with Unicode.

A few other Latin precomposed characters have been put in
as a result of intensive lobbying by ISO national standards bodies.

So the basic reasons for Latin precomposed characters are
either: 1-1 transcoding with existing character set standards
(not existing orthographies, N.B.), or standards-body politics.

> I do not understand why not adding the last missing letter I need.

Get enough national standards bodies behind you, and the thing
can be done. Otherwise, we have to stop somewhere, and here
(actually, Unicode 3.0 will have about 24 more, mostly from minor
character set standards).

John Cowan
	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 - 17:20:44 EDT