Ken Whistler wrote ...
| [BTW, if you want to fix Atomic Unicode, U+0285 was one that I
| overlooked for the retroflex hook list. Yep, there's a retroflex hook
| there, even though there is no "RETROFLEX HOOK" or "HOOK" or "TAIL"
| in the name!]
Yes, I do. So LATIN SMALL LETTER SQUAT REVERSED ESH is a LATIN SMALL
LETTER R WITH FISHHOOK, reversed, with a combining retroflex hook? And
(*)SQUAT ESH is a pure hallucination on my part. Fascinating. Thanks.
Did you also overlook LATIN SMALL LETTER EZH WITH TAIL, or is that
"something else"? (That was the only one on my original list that you
didn't mention.)
John Cowan wrote ...
| > However, I'm done. "Thank you, and good night."
| Not so fast, my friend. [...] My recommendation: don't worry about
| modifying the Unicode Standard, but go forth and create a detailed
| table for "approximate conversions" and publish it. All of us will
| be indebted to you.
My intention is to do just that, and to write a sophisticated
renderer of (at least "western") plain text that will work even in the
face of unimaginable lack of glyphic resources. (H T M L substitutions
would be easily derivable from the data file that would drive this.) If
anything comes of it, the result will be free software.
/|
o o o (_|/
/|
(_/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:48 EDT