From: D. Starner (email@example.com)
Date: Fri Mar 05 2004 - 20:01:49 EST
"Peter Constable" <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> Unicode encodes characters, not orthographic functions.
And the character is a th ligature. Why do the fine details
of how that's drawn in various unstandardized phonetic
alphabets make more difference than the huge variations in
the g's used in Latin alphabets? If we worry about variation
selectors here, why not with Runic? In this case, unlike Runic,
it is unimportant which character is used, and I would be
surprised if anybody really cares about the fine details.
-- ___________________________________________________________ Sign-up for Ads Free at Mail.com http://promo.mail.com/adsfreejump.htm
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Mar 05 2004 - 20:27:03 EST