From: Michael Everson (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Mon Jan 05 2004 - 18:53:13 EST
At 15:51 -0800 2004-01-05, Peter Kirk wrote:
>>In Pan-Turkic, though, it looks just like CYRILLIC SOFT SIGN in all
>>the sources I have seen. For lots of languages.
>Precisely. I meant that the glyph must be clearly distinct from
>U+0062, and so should be identical to U+0446. The Pan-Turkic glyph
>was probably really identical to the soft sign because printers
>would have used the same type wherever possible.
We agree! We agree! We agree!
-- Michael Everson * * Everson Typography * * http://www.evertype.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jan 05 2004 - 19:29:34 EST