From: Christopher Fynn (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sun Oct 26 2008 - 21:23:07 CST
Why not use:
G + U+0338 COMBINING LONG SOLIDUS OVERLAY
g + U+0338 COMBINING LONG SOLIDUS OVERLAY
K + U+0338
k + U+0338
In your draft proposal you call them "indivisible glyphs" - what does
that mean? IMO there is no good reason why these "indivisible glyphs"
cannot be represented by combinations of two characters. Chances are
there is already data where these are represented as a combination of
Karl Pentzlin wrote:
> Hello everybody,
> I am working on a proposal to encode letters which occur in 19th century
> Latvian and early 20th century Lower Sorbian orthography.
> These are the slashed versions of G/g, K/k, N/n, R/r, and S/s.
> All of these occur in 19th century Latvian; the slashed S/s occurs in
> early 20th century Lower Sorbian.
> You find the draft of my proposal (entitled: "Proposal to encode 10 Latin
> letters with diagonal stroke") at:
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Oct 26 2008 - 21:27:24 CST