John Cowan wrote:
> Janko Stamenovic wrote:
>> - Should be four additional characters for Cyrillic Serbian letters
>> which are different in italics from Russian letters introduced to
> No, this is really awful. Different national conventions for writing
> what is the same letter (and only in italic face, at that) ought not
> to be perpetuated *in a character standard*. Which is not the same as
> saying that they should be abandoned altogether.
Just to play devil's advocate, and to improve my understanding...
What was the motivation then for encoding the block from U+06F0 to
U+06F9, EXTENDED ARABIC-INDIC DIGIT ZERO through NINE? Aren't these
just Persian glyph variants of U+0660 to U+0669, ARABIC-INDIC DIGIT
ZERO through NINE?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:57 EDT