On 6 Jun 2010, at 06:17, Mark E. Shoulson wrote: > Unicode isn't here to make your dreams come true. It's here to encode what's > there and to enable people to do what they've already been doing, not what > you think it would be cool if they did.
There are grey areas. We all know that Latin is a casing script, but there are -- unfortunately -- many Latin characters without upper-case forms, even where the upper-case form would be inherently obvious. There is a handful of Latin letters that I would indeed stipulate to be caseless, but it's really frustrating to keep having to add the capitals in onesies and twosies. On the other hand, all the Cyrillic and very nearly all of the Greek characters (including the kai-ampersand) are casing, and the capital Coptic letters were all added on spec, on foot of the logical arguments about case-pairing. But some people still drag their feet on applying those arguments to Latin. (Not that this has anything to do with the wild hares that have been discussed here recently.) > Yes, that creates a chicken-and-egg problem (believe me, I know from attempts > to get Klingon encoded). And years later, even with PUA fonts working, Klingonists are still using Latin as their primary script. Can I buy The Klingon Dictionary in pIqaD? Why not? > But that's what the PUA is for. Indeed. Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
