From: Donald Z. Osborn (email@example.com)
Date: Thu Jan 27 2005 - 12:06:39 CST
James, Thanks for bringing this up. The possibility of choosing one form and
letting font designers modify the glyph in Yoruba Unicode fonts for reasons of
style and aesthetics has seemed to me to be a reasonable avenue to resolve this
issue but there are complications.
Using the combining vertical line below U+0329, which seems to be in the charts
uniquely for Yoruba (?), and using it effectively as "combining mark below"
would resolve the problem. But I had the impression that this kind of solution
is frowned upon (I am not familiar with the Greek example you mention).
On another level, it might handicap efforts at unified/standardized Nigerian
usage of dot-under (mainly precomposed) characters. Some other languages
notably Igbo have similar diacritics, but appearing uniquely (?) as dots. I may
be the only one bringing this kind of issue up, but if you look at current
pan-Nigerian software efforts that seek to serve a multilingual market (Konyin,
Paradigm, to name two small commercial ones), they utilize dot-under
Are there ways that software can handle different characters and combinations of
characters as equivalents in certain language settings?
Quoting James Fox <firstname.lastname@example.org>:
> You probably know how Yoruba uses a mark below certain vowels, as well as
> the letter s, to represent certain phonetic distinctions. There seems to be
> a variety of shapes for this symbol: a dot below, a short vertical line
> below, the same as before, only attached to the letter above it, a teardrop
> below, and even (so I've read), a small Greek cross below.
> Perhaps something like this could be done for the Yoruba under-mark? After
> all, the different forms used are apparently merely a matter of style, but
> Unicode disunifies them. Would it be possible to pick, say, U0329, as the
> Yoruba under-mark *exclusively*, and note that it has possible alternative
> glyphs in the code charts? Or, if that would conflict with possible
> alternate uses for U0329, could a new combing diacritic be encoded just for
> Does anyone have any comments?
> James Fox
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jan 27 2005 - 12:07:23 CST