From: African Oracle (oracle@africaservice.com)
Date: Mon May 03 2004 - 07:39:09 CDT
That is what I have said that gb is a letter, a single letter and not
combination of letter. Look at this statement -
Gbogbo awon are GB ti de. - All people from Great Britain have arrived.
Going further to be a bit funny I can say Great Britain o great britain o
awon ara Great Britain ti de.
A situation I am driving at is when looking at the GB it can be
differentiated from G and B combined together.
I do not know what you were trying to say concerning the letter g - What
about gangan, ganganran, gongo, gogongo, gudugudu and etc.... Since I do not
know what you were trying to say, I will stop there.
The issue about an underline is taken care of in one of my fonts Ariya. It
just requires a simple common sense:
1. To apply an underline that will blend with the dot below?
2. To have it so close to the letters?
3. To have the line above the dots as to distinguish that there is a dot
below?
I chose the 3rd options and that makes Ariya the best Yoruba fonts available
today.
Thanks
Dele
----- Original Message -----
From: <jameskass@att.net>
To: "Philippe Verdy" <verdy_p@wanadoo.fr>
Cc: "D. Starner" <shalesller@writeme.com>; "Unicode List"
<unicode@unicode.org>
Sent: Monday, May 03, 2004 2:20 PM
Subject: Re: Nice to join this forum....
>
> Philippe Verdy wrote,
>
> > From: "D. Starner" <shalesller@writeme.com>
> > > Unicode will not allocate any more codes for characters that can be
made
> > > precomposed, as it would disrupt normalization.
> >
> > But what about characters that may theorically be composed with
combining
> > sequences, but almost always fail to be represented successfully?
>
> Likewise.
>
> > If such ligature has a distinct semantic from a ligature created by
ligaturing
> > separate letters for presentation purpose, the character is not a
ligature (the
> > AE and OE "ligated glyphs" are distinct abstract characters) .
>
> The "gb" combination mentioned in the original post is considered a letter
> in the Yoruba alphabet. It is not a ligature, it is a digraph. Likewise,
> in the Spanish alphabet, the "ll" combination is considered a letter. It
> is also a digraph. Both of these combinations are already handled by
ASCII.
>
> (Note that the AE and OE "ligated glyphs" *are* ligatures.)
>
> > The case of dot below however should be handled in fonts by proper glyph
> > positioning and probably not by new assigned codepoints, unless this is
only one
> > possible presentation form for an actual distinct abstract character
that may
> > have other forms without this separate diacritic (for example if g with
dot
> > below was only one presentation for an abstract character that may be
also
> > renderd with a small gamma)....
>
> Yoruba doesn't use any marks with the letter "g". It does use some
diacritics
> like acute, grave, and macron to indicate tones. It also uses a mark
below
> the letters "e", "o", and "s" which alter the pronunciation of those
letters.
> This is where there remains some controversy. One faction prefers the use
> of a vertical line below which should attach to the base letter, and the
> other faction prefers to use the dot below.
>
> Best regards,
>
> James Kass
>
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri May 07 2004 - 18:45:25 CDT