From: Michael Everson (everson@evertype.com)
Date: Sun Dec 07 2003 - 19:10:41 EST
At 11:34 -0800 2003-12-07, Peter Kirk wrote:
>>Height is a (the?) recognized distinction between upper and lower
>>case. Width isn't. So a "wide capital" wouldn't be the most
>>intuitive choice.
>
>But there is a precedent for this choice. When the Latin h was
>borrowed into Cyrillic (U+04BB, borrowed c. 1940 for languages which
>were forced to change from Latin to Cyrillic orthography at short
>notice), the lower case glyph was borrowed unchanged complete with
>ascender. But the upper case shape H was already in use for the
>sound n (U+041D), and so a new upper case glyph had to be invented.
>The shape chosen, U+04BA, was essentially a wide variant of h with
>upper case serifs (conveniently also an inverted U+0427).
In principle, but that's not how the Athapascans are drawing their glottals.
-- Michael Everson * * Everson Typography * * http://www.evertype.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Dec 07 2003 - 19:52:38 EST