On Thu, 31 Jan 2013 16:35:53 +0100
Jo dm <adam_at_jooadam.hu> wrote:
> > Blame the invention of the dot over the i, or the convention of
> > omitting it when adding accents, or the adoption much later of a
> > specifically dotless i into the Turkish alphabet...
> Or the invention of a soft accent, for that matter. If the dot would
> be explicitly encoded in all cases, no problem would arise.
And that comes down to the refusal to give U+0069 the canonical
decomposition <U+0131 LATIN SMALL LETTER DOTLESS I, U+0307 COMBINING
DOT ABOVE>.
Richard.
Received on Thu Jan 31 2013 - 16:45:01 CST
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Thu Jan 31 2013 - 16:45:01 CST