From: Peter Kirk (peterkirk@qaya.org)
Date: Mon Jan 05 2004 - 05:50:15 EST
On 04/01/2004 15:48, Charles Cox wrote:
>Philippe Verdy wrote:
>
>
>
>>I maintain that if you remove the glyph shown for latin letter oi
>>(considered only as informative and not mandatory in any of its aspects),
>>and just keep its normative name, then many people will think that the
>>encoded character really represents a letter named or pronounced "oi".
>>
>>
>Which
>
>
>>is completely wrong in our case. But would allow people to use the
>>
>>
>assigned
>
>
>>code point to represent the L-shaped character "i with lower-right
>>
>>
>hook"...
>
>Not a good idea: the Nogai and Khakass languages appear to have used both
>gha/oi and "i with lower right hook" according to
>http://www.writingsystems.net/languages/nogai/nogailatin.htm and
>http://www.writingsystems.net/languages/khakass/khakasslatin.htm .
>
>Charles Cox
>
>
>
Thank you, Charles. I note also that both Nogai and Khakass used the
dotless i with lower right as well as the small b or soft sign as
distinct characters, which implies that these two cannot be considered
as glyph variants as they might be for Azerbaijani.
From the same site,
http://www.writingsystems.net/languages/azeri/azerilatin1.htm shows an
odd Azeri Latin alphabet for 1922-1928 which seems to have an L with a
hook, but this is probably an error for the dotless i with hook which is
missing.
I am amazed that this whole site seems to be at least 13 years out of
date despite the copyright notice © 1998-2004, as it has no mention of
the Azeri Latin alphabet adopted in 1991. I shall report this to the
site administrators.
-- Peter Kirk peter@qaya.org (personal) peterkirk@qaya.org (work) http://www.qaya.org/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jan 05 2004 - 06:39:37 EST