From: Philippe Verdy (verdy_p@wanadoo.fr)
Date: Mon Jan 05 2004 - 10:27:12 EST
From: "Peter Kirk" <peterkirk@qaya.org>
> On 05/01/2004 05:53, Philippe Verdy wrote:
>
> > ...
> >
> >Note that the name I gave just suggests its approximate look. It does not
> >necessarily mean its is semantically correct. So of course, if the only
use
> >of
> >this i with lower-right hook has a better traditional name, it should
have a
> >name that matches this tradition if it is ever encoded. But for now, in
> >absence of this character in Unicode, the composition:
> > <Latin small letter dotless-i><combining retroflex hook below>
> >or
> > <Latin capital letter I><combining retroflex hook below>
> >is quite good to represent it, and it works with Turkish/Azeri case
> >mappings.
> >
> >
> >
> Unfortunately in the same old alphabets the Turkish/Azeri case mappings
> don't work with the normal I/i as these follow the normal western case
> mappings.
Why not then use the Latin ton six for all texts in that period, and allow
glyph variants to show the I with right hook glyph used in early Latin
Azeri?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jan 05 2004 - 11:14:28 EST