Re: Origins of w

From: Asmus Freytag <>
Date: Mon, 16 Apr 2012 11:04:58 -0700

On 4/16/2012 9:23 AM, arno.s wrote:
> Am 16/04/2012 15:55, schrieb Andreas Prilop:
>> On Sun, 15 Apr 2012, David Starner wrote:
>>> At Wiktionary, we're looking at (U+1E98) and we can't figure out
>>> where it came from. It's from Unicode 1.1, which makes it hard to look
>>> up discussion on adding it, and the characters around it don't seem to
>>> give clues to its origin.
>> U+1E96 has the note "Semitic transliteration". Indeed U+1E96 to U+1E9A
>> are used for transliterating Arabic according to ISO 233.
>> "w with ring" is "waw with sukun".
> this must be the answer.
> U+1E97 is used for "Semitic transliteration" as well,
> and U+E99 is in Arabic very similar to U+1E98,
> but *any* consonant occurs with sukun, so why did they not
> encode "b with ring", "d with ring", "d with dot below
> and ring above" and so on?
> And seriously, I'd like to have "s with macron below" -- although
> I know there is no chance of getting it encode. it is used for
> transcribing Arab dialects.
All of these combinations exist as combining sequences. There's not
benefit in encoding them, on the contrary, adding them now would
destabilze normalization and therefore they can't be added. Most of the
ones in the 1E00 block wouldn't have been added except for the
particular history of how Unicode 1.1 was arrived at.

Received on Mon Apr 16 2012 - 13:08:40 CDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Apr 16 2012 - 13:08:41 CDT