From: Philippe Verdy (verdy_p@wanadoo.fr)
Date: Fri Jun 27 2003 - 17:22:06 EDT
On Friday, June 27, 2003 10:29 PM, Rick McGowan <rick@unicode.org>
wrote:
> The Unicode Technical Committee has posted a new issue for public
> review and comment. Details are on the following web page:
>
> http://www.unicode.org/review/
>
> Briefly, the new issue is:
>
> Issue #11 Soft Dotted Property
> Proposal: The Unicode Standard has the principle that if an accent
> is applied to an i or j, the base character loses its dot. Such
> characters are called "soft-dotted". The UTC proposes to extend
> this property to a number of characters that do not currently have
> the
> property. The accompanying document lists the characters
>
Interesting issue for the Latin Small "ij" Ligature (U+0133):
Normally the Soft_Dotted issupposed to make disappear one dot when
there's and additional diacritic above, but many applications may
keep these two dots above, fitting the diacritic in the middle.
This proposal would mean that this become illegal, and it promote the
use of an additional intermediate dot-above diacritic if the dot must
be kept.
What would be the interpretation of this dot added on top of the
ligature? Should it be still a single dot centered above the "ij"
digraph, requiring two dots to be encoded if both "i" and "j" must
have their own dot above?
Or would this require using a diaeresis instead centered above the
digraph?
For the modifier letter j or Greek letter yot, this is less ambiguous.
The proposal however is fine for the mathematical variants of i and j,
(including the double struck italic, for unification reasons)
(Note I also posted this comment in the online report form)
-- Philippe.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jun 27 2003 - 18:00:01 EDT