Re: missing bopomofo letter?

From: Kenneth Whistler (
Date: Fri Jan 19 2001 - 12:55:05 EST

Thomas Chan asked:

> I'd like to ask about a Bopomofo letter that I do not see in the
> "Bopomofo" block (U+3100-U+312F), and which would not be (and is not) in
> the "Bopomofo Extended" block (U+31A0-U+31BF).

> Its appearance can be described as being like: 1) U+3113 rotated 180
> degrees; 2) the right half of U+5E2B; or 3) U+5E00.
> Unlike U+3105-U+3129, there is no Pinyin or pseudo-Pinyin romanized name
> for it, so I follow the lead of the names of U+312A-U+312C in using the
> 1920s' "Gwoyeu Romatzyh" (Guoyu Luomazi) romanization system in referring
> to it as "letter y".
> As "letter y" is not used in annotation, it does not usually appear in
> dictionaries--I estimate it is as rare or rarer than U+312A-U+312C (which
> in turn are rarer than the standad set at U+3105-U+312C).
> Is anyone familiar with this? Has it ever been proposed? If so, was it
> rejected (and why)?

It has never been proposed, probably for the reason you cite -- it is
rare and doesn't show up in most dictionaries.

If you have reason to think it should be encoded, develop a proposal
using the WG2 Summary Proposal Form and including citations from text
showing its usage, and submit that to the UTC and WG2 for consideration.


This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:18 EDT