Fwd: Why incomplete subscript/superscript alphabet ?
kenwhistler at att.net
Fri Oct 7 13:53:16 CDT 2016
On 10/7/2016 11:25 AM, Oren Watson wrote:
> Would it be appropriate to submit an omnibus proposal for encoding all
> remaining english letters in subscript, small caps, and superscript in
> the SMP for the purpose of not arbitrarily constraining the use of
> unicode for new linguistic theories and ideas, similar to the
> mathematical characters?
I don't see that the use of Unicode characters for new linguistic
theories and ideas is arbitrarily constrained as it stands. So no, I
don't think it make sense to submit such a proposal on spec. I don't
understand peoples' fascination with multiplying the encoding of the
Latin alphabet A-Z over and over and over again. Modifier letters are
different from the mathematical styled alphabets -- modifier letters
include many letters and symbols beyond A-Z, and there isn't any clear
marginal benefit in trying to "complete" their set somehow by filling in
Latin alphabet encoding gaps without clear use cases.
More information about the Unicode