From: Arcane Jill (arcanejill@ramonsky.com)
Date: Mon Dec 15 2003 - 12:24:26 EST
Yes, I know - same as dotted a, b, c, d, e, f, g and so on are distinct
from dotless a, b, c, d, e, f, g and so on. I just meant that U+0069
could have been considered dotless - with dotted i being somewhere else.
This wouldn't necessarily stop font designers for Western markers from
putting a dot over U+0069 if they really wanted to, but for wider
markets they would have had to have made the distinction. (As /another/
aside, in English handwriting, not everyone dots their "i"s, so it seems
that the dot is kind of optional in this culture, though obviously very
important in Turkey ... but then, they also have dotted UPPERCASE I to
go with it).
I'm still not being entirely serious by the way - this is just an
amusing ponder.
Jill
-----Original Message-----
*From:* Carl W. Brown [mailto:cbrown@xnetinc.com]
*Sent:* Monday, December 15, 2003 4:46 PM
*To:* unicode@unicode.org
*Subject:* RE: Case mapping of dotless lowercase letters
Jill,
The dotted and dotless i are distinctly different, however I like to
fold them when doing searches because I don't know of any cases
where is would case search problems. However if I am searching for
Istanbul and what to include the dotted spelling as well.
Carl
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Dec 15 2003 - 12:59:47 EST