Re: Why blackletter letters?

From: Richard Wordingham <richard.wordingham_at_ntlworld.com>
Date: Thu, 12 Sep 2013 00:29:35 +0100

On Tue, 10 Sep 2013 19:48:18 +0100
Michael Everson <everson_at_evertype.com> wrote:

> On 10 Sep 2013, at 19:38, Kent Karlsson <kent.karlsson14_at_telia.com>
> wrote:
>
> > I would agree, and in addition,
> > AB3E;LATIN SMALL LETTER BLACKLETTER O WITH STROKE;Ll;0;L;;;;;N;;;;;
> > should have a compatibility decomposition to
> > 00F8;LATIN SMALL LETTER O WITH STROKE;Ll
>
> I don't agree. This is a phonetic letter not a glyph variant of a
> regular letter.

It having a compatibility decomposition makes at least as much sense as
most spacing superscript and subscript letters having compatibility
decompositions.

Richard.
Received on Wed Sep 11 2013 - 18:31:34 CDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Wed Sep 11 2013 - 18:31:35 CDT