Re: 'lower case a' and 'script a' in unicode

From: James Kass (
Date: Thu Mar 24 2005 - 20:04:47 CST

  • Next message: John Hudson: "Re: 'lower case a' and 'script a' in unicode"

    Peter Kirk wrote,

    > >Exactly. And since the developers of both Doulos SIL and Cardo well know
    > >the need to maintain such distinctions, we should expect that any future
    > >italic versions would do so.
    > But why should they?

    Because their designers understand the need to make the distinction.

    At least, that's my guess. I haven't spoken to either of the designers
    about this specific issue, though.

    When I drew glyphs for Code2001 for U+1D6FC and U+1D44E, I knew the need
    to be able to visually tell the glyphs apart and designed accordingly.

    > After all, the main audience for Doulos SIL is not
    > IPA but general purpose multilingual typesetting.

    General purpose multilingual typesetting includes IPA transcription.

    > And for such purposes
    > the desired behaviour is to change the glyph shape for italics.

    Desired behaviour appears to depend upon the desirer.

    > But I agree with Alec's point that it would be helpful to have a way of
    > suppressing that glyph change, ...

    There is. Choose an appropriate font.

    > ... So, I would want to propose a
    > separate "a" character, or perhaps a variation sequence, which is always
    > rendered with a double loop, for use in IPA, Fe'fe' etc.

    We already have separate "a" characters: U+0061 AND U+0251.

    Best regards,

    James Kass

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Mar 24 2005 - 20:06:19 CST