Re: Engmagate?

From: Jean-François Colson <jf_at_colson.eu>
Date: Fri, 13 Dec 2013 08:29:34 +0100

Le 13/12/13 00:10, Leo Broukhis a écrit :
> In the case of ɖ vs ð vs đ, there are three different letters, as
> follows from their names, that happen to have identical capital glyphs
> (those you've mentioned plus U+0110 LATIN CAPITAL LETTER D WITH STROKE).
>
> Speaking of đ, "an alternate glyph with the stroke through the bowl is
> used in Americanist orthographies" without any [loud] cries about
> disunification.

Have you ever made an inquiry about the fonts which might be rejected by
Americanists because đ has the stroke through the ascender and about the
fonts which might be rejected by Croatian/Sami/Vietnamese speakers
because đ has the stroke through the bowl?

>
> If N-Eng and n-Eng are disunified but small engs aren't (should
> they?), who keeps the "default" "toupper" conversion?
>
> > And while they are at it, I wouldn't refuse if they squared the circle.
>
> That's exactly right.
>
> Leo
>
Received on Fri Dec 13 2013 - 01:31:08 CST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Fri Dec 13 2013 - 01:31:08 CST