From: Kenneth Whistler (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Tue Dec 11 2007 - 16:54:52 CST
> (I'm far from an IPA expert, but...)
> So I would conclude that an esh-like or turned f-like glyph would just
> be approximants, and not the intended glyph for any font. So please
> make Latin small letter dotless j with stroke and hook look according
> to its name
There is very little point in designing a glyph that
looks significantly different from what the IPA
shows there in their own charts, because the point
of U+0284 is to serve as *that* character.
The Unicode representative glyph could be tweaked
a little to match the IPA glyph more closely. In particular,
the bar should be a little higher, and it wouldn't
hurt to distinguish the top hook a little more from
the top hook of the esh.
But other than that, talking about how a dotless j
with stroke and hook should look, based on its name,
is an exercise in futility. Asmus is correct.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Dec 11 2007 - 16:57:32 CST