On Tue, 01 Oct 2013 17:17:20 +0200
Frédéric Grosshans <frederic.grosshans_at_gmail.com> wrote:
> The text you scanned would then be in plain text (with s and z
> inverted)
> 49. How are we to decide between s and z in such words as
> anatemathiₛᷦe cauteriₛᷦe, criticiₛᷦe, deodoriₛᷦe, dogmatiₛᷦe,
> fraterniₛᷦe and the rest ? Many of these are derived from Greek
> Since that is possible with current unicode while the original
> orthography of Henry Alford's 1888 book is not, I think this an
> argument to encode LATIN SUBSCRIPT LATIN Z.
Why should the subscript and combining superscript letters be the
'same' size?
Richard.
Received on Tue Oct 01 2013 - 12:14:07 CDT
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Tue Oct 01 2013 - 12:14:07 CDT