From: Peter Constable (petercon@microsoft.com)
Date: Thu Jan 03 2008 - 14:25:22 CST
> From: unicode-bounce@unicode.org [mailto:unicode-bounce@unicode.org] On
> Behalf Of Michael Everson
> >Well, we must invent to the extent of devising a name; but I think
> >you mean, as I would suggest, that requires only a minimal amount of
> >innovation in this case -- much less than inventing a casing
> >relationship with small letter script g.
>
> The thing is clearly a capital letter, being based on a capital G. I
> don't believe it is caseless, or lower-case, despite its use in
> phonetic text.
The thing is clearly a combination of a capital letter (G) and a lower-case letter (j). IMO, that does not make it a capital; it makes it mixed. The *closest* analog in existing characters is title-case, but in this instance caseless is another option and might make more sense.
> The small script g is in my view its natural
> lower-case pair;
That is a purely revisionist invention. This has no more connection to small script g than a polar bear has to a beluga whale.
Peter
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jan 03 2008 - 14:27:42 CST