Re: (SC2WG2.609) New contribution N2705

From: Michael Everson (
Date: Tue Feb 17 2004 - 15:05:12 EST

  • Next message: Peter Constable: "RE: (SC2WG2.609) New contribution N2705"

    At 11:24 -0800 2004-02-17, Peter Kirk wrote:

    >These subscript letters and subscript '/' really don't look like
    >plain text to me. The examples quoted, e.g.
    >*hxC(V)- ~ *shxC(V)- [the x's to be subscripted]
    >are more like mathematical formulae than text.

    They are not mathematical formulae. It is a kind of linguistic
    (though not phonetic) notation. Other encoded subscripts are already
    in use for the laryngeals, which is why this has been proposed.

    >I would suggest that consideration is given to an extension of the
    >Unicode Mathematical Alphanumeric Symbols block to include a full
    >range of subscript letters etc, and that such letters be used for
    >applications such as this one.

    There is no evidence that mathematicians have such a requirement.
    Indo-Europeanists do.

    >If such a proposal is considered unacceptable because it goes beyond
    >what is plain text, then so should this proposal be.

    I disagree.

    Michael Everson * * Everson Typography *  *

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Feb 17 2004 - 15:58:39 EST