Re: unicode Digest V4 #3

From: Philippe Verdy (
Date: Mon Jan 05 2004 - 10:27:12 EST

  • Next message: Michael Everson: "Re: LATIN SOFT SIGN"

    From: "Peter Kirk" <>
    > On 05/01/2004 05:53, Philippe Verdy wrote:
    > > ...
    > >
    > >Note that the name I gave just suggests its approximate look. It does not
    > >necessarily mean its is semantically correct. So of course, if the only
    > >of
    > >this i with lower-right hook has a better traditional name, it should
    have a
    > >name that matches this tradition if it is ever encoded. But for now, in
    > >absence of this character in Unicode, the composition:
    > > <Latin small letter dotless-i><combining retroflex hook below>
    > >or
    > > <Latin capital letter I><combining retroflex hook below>
    > >is quite good to represent it, and it works with Turkish/Azeri case
    > >mappings.
    > >
    > >
    > >
    > Unfortunately in the same old alphabets the Turkish/Azeri case mappings
    > don't work with the normal I/i as these follow the normal western case
    > mappings.

    Why not then use the Latin ton six for all texts in that period, and allow
    glyph variants to show the I with right hook glyph used in early Latin

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jan 05 2004 - 11:14:28 EST