On Sun, 8 Jul 2012 18:44:41 +0530
Shriramana Sharma <samjnaa_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> On Sun, Jul 8, 2012 at 6:32 PM, Richard Wordingham
> <richard.wordingham_at_ntlworld.com> wrote:
> > On the contrary, doubling for (historical) retroflexion is a fairly
> > clear convention.
> Where, please? I have never heard of it. (But of course my knowledge
> is limited.)
If one is used to the dot below for retroflexion, it leaps out at one as
soon as one reads the code chart accompanying the Devanagari block. As
far as I am aware, the convention is not documented anywhere.
Richard.
Received on Sun Jul 08 2012 - 08:29:51 CDT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Sun Jul 08 2012 - 08:29:52 CDT