Re: ogonek vs. retroflex hook

Date: Wed Apr 02 2003 - 12:24:57 EST

  • Next message: John Hudson: "Re: ogonek vs. retroflex hook"

    Jim Allen wrote on 04/02/2003 09:59:02 AM:

    > U+0322 RETROFLEX HOOK is an artifact of Unicode...

    I was not specifically asking about this combining mark, and I have been
    convinced that it's use should be avoided.

    My question was really typographic in nature. And specifically related to
    research to determine if there are additional atomic retroflex-hooked
    characters that need to be added to Unicode. I needed to know when I'm
    looking at samples whether they represent instanced of retroflex-hooked
    characters or not. Of course, what sounds they are used to represent is
    relevant info, but not necessarily a determining factor since character are
    often repurposed by linguists looking for some way to represent the sounds
    of a given language.

    - Peter

    Peter Constable

    Non-Roman Script Initiative, SIL International
    7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd., Dallas, TX 75236, USA
    Tel: +1 972 708 7485

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Apr 02 2003 - 13:21:30 EST