> However, could there be an encoding for: > <LATIN CAPITAL LETTER DOTLESS J> > with a lowercase mapping to the new: > <LATIN SMALL LETTER DOTLESS J> > Of course the former would look exactly the same as the > ASCII uppercase J, except that it would have a distinct > case mapping. This would avoid, for j/J the nightmare > of dotless-i/dotted-i/I...
It introduces another difficulty though - If there are languages using a "LATIN SMALL LETTER DOTLESS J" and words written in those languages are sometimes capitalised - then presumably there is already data where "LATIN CAPITAL LETTER J" has already been used as the upper case for "LATIN SMALL LETTER DOTLESS J" introducing a separate A purist might argue that if there are no places where a using "LATIN CAPITAL LETTER DOTLESS J" instead of "LATIN SMALL LETTER DOTLESS J" makes a lexical difference then one is simply a glyph variant of the other. If that is so then there is no need for two characters one form could be handled by higher level mark-up and rendered using a different glyph. I think Latin has too long been considered a "simple script" - if one takes into account the number of languages written in Latin script and all the additions modifications used to do this, Latin is a "complex script". In view of this before adding new Latin characters it might be a good idea to first consider the kind of solutions used for scripts that have always been considered "complex". - Chris
