If SignWriting were encoded as per N4090 and I were implementing text display support for those characters, I would not allow any of the SignWriting display controls to itemize together with characters of any other script. I.e., I would explicitly not support any of the effects you describe involving Latin or other scripts.
Peter Sent from my Windows 8 PC<http://windows.microsoft.com/consumer-preview> From: Jean-François Colson Sent: June 7, 2012 6:06:08 PM To: unicode@unicode.org Subject: Re: Latin chi and stretched x Le 07/06/12 23:05, Julian Bradfield a écrit : > David Starner wrote: >> LATIN SMALL LETTER ROTATED P was used; see >> http://commons.wikimedia.org/wiki/File:BAE-Siouan_Alphabet.png . It >> has caused some whimpering among those trying to transcribe the text. > Urk! And there's rotated "s" as well. > > Alright, I take it back. There is no limit to the barminess of script > inventors. > Obviously what we need are combining marks whose visual effect > is reversing/rotating the previous glyph. No, I didn't say that, I > really didn't say that... You did! You’re guilty! 15 rotation characters have already been proposed for signwriting: http://std.dkuug.dk/JTC1/SC2/WG2/docs/n4090.pdf Look at page 4. If those characters could be applied to Latin letters, we’d have: ʁ = ʀ + SWR13 ᴙ = ʀ + SWR9 ᴚ = ʀ + SWR5 ᴝ = u + SWR3 ᴟ = m + SWR7 That would be very practical. However, we’d still miss combining marks for superscripts, subscripts, smallcaps or combining letters.