Re: Dotless J with stroke.

From: Asmus Freytag (
Date: Tue Dec 11 2007 - 15:39:04 CST

  • Next message: John Hudson: "Re: Dotless J with stroke."

    On 12/11/2007 9:34 AM, Andreas Stötzner wrote:
    > And: “Just names” and “just glyphs” – you only make it obscure that way.
    It's been a long established principle of the Unicode Standard (and
    10646!) to freeze names of characters, once adopted. That makes them
    different from other types of named entities; for one, many names have
    known defects that prevent them from being reasonable description of
    their associated characters. Therefore, if you need an accurate
    description of a character, in the general case, you need to use an
    _alias_, not a formal character name.

    It's been an equally established principle that characters can be
    represented by a range of glyphs, where the range depends on the
    character. What gets depicted in the formal document tries to be both
    typical and neutral (avoiding idiosyncratic design choices). Finally,
    where appropriate, a serifed, specifically times-like font is used to
    show more details and cut down on accidental confusibility between
    representative glyphs for different characters.

    The goal with the glyphs is to be an aid in identifying the character in
    question, in a list(!), without accidentally suggesting some feature not
    normally found in actual font designs for it.

    It's a total non-goal to make the glyph a realization of the (possibly
    faulty) description embodied in a character name. In fact, changing the
    glyph in this instance could be construed as casting doubts on the
    fundamental identity of the character as being the IPA character in this

    Character coding stability requires that everything be done to maintain
    the *identity* of what is coded at a given position. The committees must
    be constantly vigilant against "creeping reinterpretation" of existing

    Yes, following these principles does lead to the need for additional
    explanation (including the use of character name aliases), but
    realistically, there's no alternative. So pretending that they don't
    apply is not helpful, to say the least.

    I would have thought, that, as a member of the German committee, you
    were firmly subscribed to these long-standing principles of the
    character encoding work.


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Dec 11 2007 - 15:41:33 CST