Re: Standaridized variation sequences for the Desert alphabet?

From: Michael Everson <>
Date: Sun, 26 Mar 2017 14:15:03 +0100

> On 26 Mar 2017, at 09:12, Martin J. Dürst <> wrote:
>> Thats a good point: any disunification requires showing examples of
>> contrasting uses.
> Fully agreed.

The default position is NOT “everything is encoded unified until disunified”. The characters in question have different and undisputed origins, undisputed. We’ve encoded one pair; evidently this pair was deprecated and another pair was devised. The letters wynn and w are also used for the same thing. They too have different origins and are encoded separately. The letters yogh and ezh have different origins and are encoded separately. (These are not perfect analogies, but they are pertinent.)

> We haven't yet heard of any contrasting uses for the letter shapes we are discussing.

Contrasting use is NOT the only criterion we apply when establishing the characterhood of characters. Please try to remember that. (It’s a bit shocking to have to remind people of this.

Michael Everson
Received on Sun Mar 26 2017 - 08:15:21 CDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Sun Mar 26 2017 - 08:15:21 CDT