From: Anto'nio Martins-Tuva'lkin (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Tue Mar 18 2003 - 10:46:30 EST
On 2003.03.17, 23:26, Peter_Constable@sil.org <Peter_Constable@sil.org> wrote:
> U+01B7: The glyph that appears in the code charts is that shown in
> LtnCapEzh_LrgLC.gif. In the Dagbani language of Ghana, they use a small
> letter that looks like U+0292 LATIN SMALL LETTER EZH, but the capital
> counterpart that they use is like the glyph shown in
> LtnCapEzh_RevSigma.gif. This is quite different in appearance from the
> representative glyph for U+01B7. Should this be considered a glyph
> variant of U+01B7, or should it be considered a distinct character?
I guess it is indeed a variant of U+01B7, but it sure looks better than
the usual "3"-like shape of it...
> U+00D0: The glyph that appears in the code charts for U+00D0 is shown
> in LtnCapEth_DStrk.gif. Now, the African Reference Alphabet document
> that was produced at a conference in Niamey in 1978 proposed a small
> letter that looks like U+00F0 LATIN SMALL LETTER ETH, but the capital
> counterpart is like the glyph shown in LtnCapEthLrgSqLC.gif. This is
> quite different in appearance from the representative glyph for
> U+00D0. Should this be considered a glyph variant of U+00D0, or should
> it be considered a distinct character?
I guess it is yes a glyph variant but rather for U+0189.
On 2003.03.18, 00:20, Kenneth Whistler <email@example.com> wrote:
> To do otherwise would be to introduce casing problems for eth.
No, if it is supposed to be, as I suppose, U+0189, whose the LC form is
U+0256. Anyway, U+00D0 and U+0110 are casing problems enough for this
António MARTINS-Tuválkin, | ()|
R. Laureano de Oliveira, 64 r/c esq. |
PT-1885-050 MOSCAVIDE (LRS) Não me invejo de quem tem |
+351 917 511 459 carros, parelhas e montes |
http://www.tuvalkin.web.pt/bandeira/ só me invejo de quem bebe |
http://pagina.de/bandeiras/ a água em todas as fontes |
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Mar 18 2003 - 16:38:02 EST