Re: Uppercase ▀ is coming? (U+1E9E)

From: Michael Everson (
Date: Sat May 05 2007 - 09:55:18 CST

  • Next message: Marnen Laibow-Koser: "Re: Uppercase ▀ is coming? (U+1E9E)"

    At 11:46 -0400 2007-05-05, Marnen Laibow-Koser wrote:
    >I think there is a difference, but I am having
    >trouble figuring out where it lies if your case
    >is the only grounds for inclusion of capital ▀.

    I never said that the grounds for encoding it was
    only preference in the spelling of personal names.

    >I rephrase the question: does Unicode, as it
    >stands before this proposal, really deny Peter
    >the character he needs?

    Yes, it really does.

    >>What the Innenministerium puts on his Ausweis
    >>is perhaps beyond his control, but what he
    >>prefers to send and receive in e-mail is his
    >Yes. But if he departs from standard spelling,
    >perhaps he shouldn't expect a standard encoding
    >to contain the characters he needs.

    Dotted consonants are no longer used in the
    standard spelling of Irish, but they are encoded

    >>>If I want Laibow-Koser to be uppercased as
    >>>LAIBOW-K9SER, that doesn't mean we suddenly
    >>>need a LATIN UPPERCASE O TYPE TWO that looks
    >>>suspiciously like DIGIT NINE, does it?
    >>I'm not impressed by the analogy. Sorry.
    >And why not? Where is the difference? What am
    >I doing that Peter is not, or vice versa?

    You invented LATIN UPPERCASE O TYPE TWO. But
    LATIN CAPITAL LETTER SHARP S is nothing new, and
    has been around for a century at least.

    Michael Everson *

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat May 05 2007 - 09:59:28 CST