On 16 Aug 2012, at 16:55, Jukka K. Korpela wrote:
> In a sense, it’s just the way it is, but I think I can see the reasoning behind this. Although strokes across letters are comparable to diacritic marks in a sense, and surely historically, the also differ from them in essential ways. They cross over letters instead of just sitting above, below, or otherwise near a base letters. perhaps more importantly, they differ in placement, width, and angle: compare e.g. “ø”, “ł”, and “đ” with each other. If the stroke were defined as a diacritic, its identity would be rather vague.
Correct.
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
Received on Thu Aug 16 2012 - 11:08:15 CDT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Thu Aug 16 2012 - 11:08:15 CDT