On 06/11/2001 10:59:31 AM Marco Cimarosti wrote:

>As you see, both the little "v" above and the dot underneath are included:

I'm not sure either of these are good ideas. First, one might expect that
the dot below concept could be extended, but surely nobody ever dreamed of
encoding the character at 069D using umlaut below. Also, I don't think the
small v is a caron. Does 06C9 have a circumflex? *Maybe*, but it's
certainly not obvious that that's what that thing should be called. Less so
the v, which doesn't look like a caron.

>BTW, Isn't it surprising that computers are so important nowadays that a
>orthography is being developed looking at Unicode charts?

It's because people like Bob have started getting the ears of linguists,
telling them not to invent things willy nilly, but to consider what's
already there in the interest of getting their orthography supported on
their computers. Sometimes it still makes sense to invent a new character.
Sometimes, though, it's not.

- Peter

Peter Constable

Non-Roman Script Initiative, SIL International
7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd., Dallas, TX 75236, USA
Tel: +1 972 708 7485
E-mail: <peter_constable@...>