Michael Everson wrote, in response to Robert Brady:
>> LATIN SMALL LETTER THETA,
>> LATIN SMALL LETTER CHI,
>> LATIN SMALL LETTER BETA,
>>in Unicode 4. There are only 5 of these. There will not be any more, and
>>without them, IPA support in Unicode is broken.
>I support the last three because of the functionality issue of sorting
>Greek and IPA text (in Latin transcription Beta is not supposed to sort
>after z, which it does with the unification).
I agree with both Robert and Michael regarding these three. Having made a
font which contained both IPA and Greek support, I can vouch that this
unification causes problems: the sorting problem Michael mentioned and also
a design problem because the Greek glyphs are not necessarily appropriate
in the IPA context (e.g. they tend to be more cursive than their Latin
counterparts).
On the other hand, I have not encountered similar problems in the
unification of the open front vowel with the Latin lowercase a, nor do I
see a need for a separate codepoint for the double storey g (i.e.
looptail), particularly since this form does not appear in standard IPA
notation and has no semantic value distinct from Latin letter g.
John Hudson, Type Director
Tiro Typeworks
Vancouver, BC
www.tiro.com
[email protected]
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:51 EDT