Torsten Mohrin scripsit:
> 1) When should I use 'dotless i'? Only when I really want a 'dotless
> i' without anything above it?
Yes, which in practice means only when encoding Turkish text.
> 2) Is 'dotless i' with 'dot above' useful? Should it be used in
> Turkish (would simplify case conversion)?
No, I and others have been down that road before. The consensus is
that Turkish text should be encoded in just one way, the obvious one,
and that case-conversion needs a small special case for Turkish.
(The rationale is that there is too much 8859-9 text with mixed
English and Turkish that does it the obvious way, and figuring
out which "i"s are Turkish is just too hard.)
There is now a Unicode data file called SpecialCases which provides
that and other such information.
> 3) How do I encode a 'dotfull i' with an 'accent grave' above it?
> LATIN SMALL LETTER I + COMBINING DOT ABOVE + COMBINING GRAVE ACCENT
> or LATIN SMALL LETTER DOTLESS I + COMBINING DOT ABOVE + COMBINING
> GRAVE ACCENT ?
The former is blessed by the Unicode Standard and should be employed,
for the sake of uniformity in text processes other than rendering.
--
John Cowan cowan@ccil.org
I am a member of a civilization. --David Brin
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:48 EDT