From: Jonathan Rosenne (jr@qsm.co.il)
Date: Sat Jul 03 2010 - 00:44:18 CDT
Did you not read my answer to you of June 7?
Quote
How about
A B C D E F G H I K L M N O P Q R S T V X Y Z
?
There are also some extensions, see
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Latin_alphabet for general background.
Unquote
Best regards,
Jony Rosenne
> -----Original Message-----
> From: unicode-bounce@unicode.org [mailto:unicode-bounce@unicode.org] On
> Behalf Of Tulasi
> Sent: Saturday, July 03, 2010 3:32 AM
> To: unicode@unicode.org
> Subject: Re: Latin Script
>
> It seems I made a minor mistake on "classic Latin script"
> According to link
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/History_of_the_Latin_alphabet
> J U W are not included in "classic Latin script".
>
> Tulasi
>
>
> From: Tulasi <tulasird@gmail.com>
> Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 19:53:05 -0700
> Subject: Re: Latin Script
> To: vanisaac@boil.afraid.org
> Cc: Edward Cherlin <echerlin@gmail.com>, unicode@unicode.org, Mark
> Davis ? <mark@macchiato.com>, Otto Stolz <Otto.Stolz@uni-konstanz.de>,
> Jonathan Rosenne <jr@qsm.co.il>
>
> Actually, if I do not see letters/symbols along with names, in some
> cases I cannot recognize. I am not a typographer either.
>
> So like
> Edward -> Close, but not quite. Consider LATIN SMALL LETTER PHI (?)
> it would be great should you please post both name & letter/symbol
> associated with the name.
>
> Van -> Do you want to consider Y and Z as not Latin letters, because
> they were borrowed from Greek
>
> I din't think Latin speakers borrowed. From my memory hole they had
> adopted from Greek. And since this adoption was the work of true Latin
> speakers all ALL CAPS, i.e., A B C ... ... ... Z are known to be
> "classic Latin script". Also see the email by Jonathan Rosenne.
>
> If you read Edward's email he highlighted on chronology (of adoption
> from different scripts).
>
> Did true Latin speakers adopt LATIN SMALL LETTER PHI (?) to Latin
> script?
> Or was it done very recently after Unicode was created?
>
> May I ask Van please,
> can you post both names & symbols/letters that you referred in your
> email?
> Also please show how how GREEK SMALL LETTER PHI looks like.
>
> This will help me to understand!
>
> Thanks,
> Tulasi
>
>
> From: vanisaac@boil.afraid.org
> Date: Mon, 14 Jun 2010 13:43:18 -0700
> Subject: Re: Latin Script
> To: Tulasi <tulasird@gmail.com>, Edward Cherlin <echerlin@gmail.com>
> Cc: unicode@unicode.org, Mark Davis ? <mark@macchiato.com>, Otto Stolz
> <Otto.Stolz@uni-konstanz.de>, vanisaac@boil.afraid.org, Jonathan
> Rosenne <jr@qsm.co.il>
>
> From: Tulasi <tulasird@gmail.com>
>
> > Thanks for the input Edward!
> > Yep, I shell explore time-chronology as well.
> >
> > Edward -> Close, but not quite. Consider LATIN SMALL LETTER PHI (?).
>
> Amazingly, I consider Latin Small Letter Phi to be a part of the Latin
> script. Why?: in my typographic life, I would design it differently
> from Greek small Letter Phi. The Greek phi needs to work with other
> Greek letters. The Latin phi needs to work in phonetic notation, which
> is Latin letters; it needs to have more contrast with Latin Small
> Letter Q than the Greek phi, so it has an ascender. As a Classicist, a
> Greek phi with an ascender interrupts the flow of text, unless in a
> slant font, so it is designed quite differently from Latin Small
> Letter Phi. It's just like Cyrillic Dze and Sha, which have been
> borrowed from Latin and Coptic, are designed and act like Cyrillic
> letters.
>
> > Mark gave a new link of letter/symbol that has LATIN (thanks Mark!):
> > Mark -> http://unicode.org/cldr/utility/list-
> unicodeset.jsp?a=[:script=Latn:]&g=age
> >
> > Now, how many letters/symbols in that link are like "LATIN SMALL
> > LETTER PHI (?)", i.e., not from Latin-script?
>
> there's really no way to make any sort of distinction like that. Do
> you want to consider Y and Z as not Latin letters, because they were
> borrowed from Greek, not adapted from Etruscan? How about ? and Wynn?
> They are from Runic. Should U+019B, Latin Small Letter Lambda with
> Stroke be considered not Latin, even though it is not found in any
> other script? There are a number of these, and the only classification
> that is not completely arbitrary is to consider them ALL to be part of
> the Latin script, including Latin Small Letter Phi.
>
> > Also, how do I find the list of letters/symbols that do not have
> LATIN
> > in names but from Latin-script?
>
> The Spacing Modfier Letters and Combining Diacritical Marks may also
> need to be included for a really comprehensive list, and these are
> contained in their own blocks, Phonetic Extensions, and Phonetic
> Extensions Supplement. Then the question is whether you should include
> Devanagari Om. What about Currency signs? Punctuation? Should it
> simply be the union of Script=common and Script=Latin? Script=common
> includes puntucation from all languages, so you end up with Dandas and
> Arabic commas, is that right? The question really only makes sense if
> it has context: for what purpose are you defining something as Latin
> script?
>
> > Tulasi
>
> Van
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Jul 03 2010 - 00:50:45 CDT