Casefolding Sigma (was: Re: IDNAbis PreprocessingDraft)
everson at evertype.com
Fri Jan 25 12:03:28 CET 2008
At 19:08 +0900 2008-01-25, Martin Duerst wrote:
>Canadian Syllabics "Final" seem to be more like some modifier characters.
Martin! "Seem"? I really don't believe that we
should be proceeding with this kind of
lackadaisical linguistic naïveté.
Canadian Syllabics finals are letters. They are
prototypically final consonants and often marks
of labialization. One *might* call the
labializers "modifiers" but one certainly cannot
do so for the finals. Your analysis was based on
an opinion of the superficial glyph appearance,
not on the actual use of the characters.
>Two of them even don't have any glyph printed in
>Unicode 5.0, and there is no explanation in the
>text, so this is difficult to say with certainty.
What characters do not have glyphs in Unicode 5.0?
>For New Tai Lue, these are in some sense
>composed forms of a base consonant and a virama.
>If they are dealt with in a similar way to other
>Indic scripts, I guess these variants should be
Have you read the proposals to encode New Tai
Lue, which describes the script and its
characters? There is no Virama encoded for New
My goodness, this activity can be disheartening.
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com
More information about the Idna-update