On 03/02/2004 11:22:54 Peter Kirk wrote:
>It is interesting that SIL has seen the need to include precomposed >combinations with U+0321 palatalized hook and U+0322 retroflex hook. >Perhaps this is because these diacritics cannot be automatically >combined with their base characters.
Rather, it is because after discussions with various members of UTC it seems that the U+0321 and U+0322 were not really intended to be used productively. Cf U+01AB which has no decomposition.
... Specifically, we have tried not to violate Unicode's encoding principles, and believe that most of the characters we have in the PUA stand a good chance of being included into Unicode at some point in the future when sufficient supporting evidence is available.
Bob
Thanks, Bob, for the clarification. (Although Unicode's encoding principles have been violated in the Hebrew alternatives recommended.) I have already provided offlist supporting evidence for the use of several letters with U+0321 style hooks, from a Russian grammar (in English) dated 2000 - see my posting "Pseudo-IPA characters for Russian" of 20 Jan. Let's see if the UTC agrees to add these characters, or recommends combinations with U+0321.
-- Peter Kirk [EMAIL PROTECTED] (personal) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) http://www.qaya.org/
