RE: New Public Review Issue posted

From: Peter Constable (petercon@microsoft.com)
Date: Wed May 26 2004 - 15:16:32 CDT

Next message: Peter Constable: "PH: the core issues (was RE: Palaeo-Hebrew, Phoenician, and Unicode (Phoenician Unicode proposal)"

Previous message: Peter Constable: "RE: Response to Everson Phoenician and why June 7?"
Maybe in reply to: Rick McGowan: "New Public Review Issue posted"
Next in thread: Michael Everson: "RE: New Public Review Issue posted"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

> From: unicode-bounce@unicode.org [mailto:unicode-bounce@unicode.org]
On Behalf
> Of D. Starner

> Last time I went looking for Modifier Letter Small N,
> I decided it was encoded as U+207F, SUPERSCRIPT LATIN SMALL
> LETTER N. If it's not, pretty much every variant of n has
> been encoded as a modifier letter, except for the basic small
> letter.

Whatever the character properties, it is certainly the case that U+207F
is used in phonetic transcription in analogous contexts to characters in
the Modifier Letters block.

Peter

Peter Constable
Globalization Infrastructure and Font Technologies
Microsoft Windows Division

Next message: Peter Constable: "PH: the core issues (was RE: Palaeo-Hebrew, Phoenician, and Unicode (Phoenician Unicode proposal)"
Previous message: Peter Constable: "RE: Response to Everson Phoenician and why June 7?"
Maybe in reply to: Rick McGowan: "New Public Review Issue posted"
Next in thread: Michael Everson: "RE: New Public Review Issue posted"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed May 26 2004 - 15:17:36 CDT