From: Karl Pentzlin (karl-pentzlin@acssoft.de)
Date: Mon Jan 31 2011 - 07:22:58 CST
Below is a list of the Latin subscript small letters encoded in
Unicode 6.0, sorted alphabetically.
As shown, the letters have different General Category values:
The "older" ones have Ll, while the "newer" ones (mostly introduced
by N2788 and N3571, and code points fixed by L2/09-195) have Lm.
1. Is there a specific reason that Ll was retained for the "older"
characters?
2. Is it a good idea to propose to change Ll to Lm for the "older"
characters, just for uniformity?
3. If additional Latin subscript small letters are proposed, is
Lm the preferred General Category value?
- Karl
2090;LATIN SUBSCRIPT SMALL LETTER A;Lm;0;L;<sub> 0061;;;;N;;;;;
2091;LATIN SUBSCRIPT SMALL LETTER E;Lm;0;L;<sub> 0065;;;;N;;;;;
2095;LATIN SUBSCRIPT SMALL LETTER H;Lm;0;L;<sub> 0068;;;;N;;;;;
1D62;LATIN SUBSCRIPT SMALL LETTER I;Ll;0;L;<sub> 0069;;;;N;;;;;
2C7C;LATIN SUBSCRIPT SMALL LETTER J;Ll;0;L;<sub> 006A;;;;N;;;;;
2096;LATIN SUBSCRIPT SMALL LETTER K;Lm;0;L;<sub> 006B;;;;N;;;;;
2097;LATIN SUBSCRIPT SMALL LETTER L;Lm;0;L;<sub> 006C;;;;N;;;;;
2098;LATIN SUBSCRIPT SMALL LETTER M;Lm;0;L;<sub> 006D;;;;N;;;;;
2099;LATIN SUBSCRIPT SMALL LETTER N;Lm;0;L;<sub> 006E;;;;N;;;;;
2092;LATIN SUBSCRIPT SMALL LETTER O;Lm;0;L;<sub> 006F;;;;N;;;;;
209A;LATIN SUBSCRIPT SMALL LETTER P;Lm;0;L;<sub> 0070;;;;N;;;;;
1D63;LATIN SUBSCRIPT SMALL LETTER R;Ll;0;L;<sub> 0072;;;;N;;;;;
209B;LATIN SUBSCRIPT SMALL LETTER S;Lm;0;L;<sub> 0073;;;;N;;;;;
209C;LATIN SUBSCRIPT SMALL LETTER T;Lm;0;L;<sub> 0074;;;;N;;;;;
1D64;LATIN SUBSCRIPT SMALL LETTER U;Ll;0;L;<sub> 0075;;;;N;;;;;
1D65;LATIN SUBSCRIPT SMALL LETTER V;Ll;0;L;<sub> 0076;;;;N;;;;;
2093;LATIN SUBSCRIPT SMALL LETTER X;Lm;0;L;<sub> 0078;;;;N;;;;;
2094;LATIN SUBSCRIPT SMALL LETTER SCHWA;Lm;0;L;<sub> 0259;;;;N;;;;;
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jan 31 2011 - 07:27:04 CST