Re: CGJ for Two Greek Ligatures?

From: vlad (
Date: Sun Mar 06 2005 - 18:57:48 CST

  • Next message: Curtis Clark: "Re: CGJ for Two Greek Ligatures?"

    > > Couldn't the automatic ligation of fi be prevented in Turkish/Azeri by
    > > encoding their dotted i as i + COMBINING DOT ABOVE, rather than i
    > > alone?
    > It could, but that's not what the character is.

    Well, it seems to me that i is undefined as to whether it has a dot
    above or not. Its dot may disappear when ligated or when replaced with
    a diacritic, and some fonts might display it dotless in all situations
    (for example, fonts where lowercase letters are displayed as small
    caps). In a situation where it is important to distinguish between
    dotted and undotted forms, wouldn't it make sense to encode an
    explicitly dotted form, rather than an ambiguous one?

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Mar 06 2005 - 18:58:28 CST