Re: Latin letter GHA or Latin letter IO ?

From: Philippe Verdy (
Date: Mon Jan 05 2004 - 20:00:13 EST

  • Next message: Michael Everson: "Re: Latin letter GHA or Latin letter IO ?"

    From: "Kenneth Whistler" <>
    > When the combination of character name and representative
    > glyph and associated informative annotations is insufficient
    > to correctly identify a character in the standard, the
    > recourse is to Ask the Experts and request further annotation
    > of the standard to assist future users from running into the
    > same problem.

    Thanks for your view on this issue. It is far less extreme than the Michael
    position, which just consists in saying "informative" without more
    justification, when you clearly admit that they are also mandatory. This
    makes a significant difference, and I think that this would apply too with
    the ISO/IEC 10646 repertoire definition (which also has its own names, but
    where the couple name+glyph is considered important for character
    identification, even in absence of normative character properties for the
    initial assignments before they are merged into Unicode).

    I hoped I had found such wording in the Standard to clarify things there.

    Thanks a lot.

    (One note about the title of the thread: I just noticed that I had
    misordered the letters in "IO" which of course should read "OI"; this was a
    typo due to fast keyboard input, and was not expected here).

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jan 05 2004 - 20:40:51 EST