Date: Tue Feb 17 2004 - 16:02:58 EST
In addition, superscripts and subscripts for palatalization, velarization,
aspiration, etc., already exist in the Unicode IPA block. It seems to me that
the function of such glyphs is similar to that of a diacritic in that it
modifies the meaning of the base glyph.
How is the term "plain text" being used here? Is the distinction one between
natural language and scientific notation?
If so, why is IPA included in the Unicode standard?
Quoting Michael Everson <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
> 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 * * http://www.evertype.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Feb 17 2004 - 17:24:08 EST