Ar 10:24 -0800 2000-04-10, scríobh Kenneth Whistler:
>Given Nick Nicholas' explanation of the antisigma, it seems
>correct that no currently encoded Unicode 3.0 character could
>be considered to *be* that character. We would need a reversed
>form of U+03F2 GREEK LUNATE SIGMA SYMBOL to have the version
>appropriate to Greek text.
It sounds like it would have to be a capital,
>However, as a Latin adaptation, you should also consider that
>there already *is* a reversed Latin capital C in the encoding:
>U+2183 ROMAN NUMERAL REVERSED ONE HUNDRED.
Is it a Latin adaptation? I think the Claudius' psi should use this, but it
doesn't sound as though the antisigma as used in Greek texts is the same
Of course, we haven't seen the source text.
>Also, there already *is* a turned Latin capital F in the encoding:
>U+2132 TURNED CAPITAL F. (Unless the digamma inversum is being
>represented with an *inverted* capital F, instead of a *turned*
>Both of these character *could* be used as approximations for the
>Latin adaptation as you see it in the linguistic lexicon. They
>would more or less accurately represent what the editor was
>doing -- though would not be appropriate for the original form
>of the text.
I don't see why you say this. It seems to me that REVERSED ONE HUNDRED is a
Latin sign that could be used to represent Claudius' psi perfectly well; or
is it a property issue?
Michael Everson ** Everson Gunn Teoranta ** http://www.egt.ie
15 Port Chaeimhghein Íochtarach; Baile Átha Cliath 2; Éire/Ireland
Vox +353 1 478 2597 ** Fax +353 1 478 2597 ** Mob +353 86 807 9169
27 Páirc an Fhéithlinn; Baile an Bhóthair; Co. Átha Cliath; Éire
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:01 EDT