Re: Fwd: Why incomplete subscript/superscript alphabet ?

2016-10-09 Thread Doug Ewell
Denis Jacquerye wrote: Regarding the superscript q, in some rare cases, it is used to indicate pharyngealization or a pharyngeal consonant instead of the Latin letter pharyngeal voiced fricative U+0295 ʕ, the modifier letter reversed glottal stop U+02C1 ˁ or the modifier letter small reversed

Re: Fwd: Why incomplete subscript/superscript alphabet ?

2016-10-09 Thread Denis Jacquerye
Regarding the superscript q, in some rare cases, it is used to indicate pharyngealization or a pharyngeal consonant instead of the Latin letter pharyngeal voiced fricative U+0295 ʕ, the modifier letter reversed glottal stop U+02C1 ˁ or the modifier letter small reversed glottal stop U+02E4 ˤ.

Re: Fwd: Why incomplete subscript/superscript alphabet ?

2016-10-08 Thread Julian Bradfield
On 2016-10-07, Oren Watson wrote: > I scarcely think that a use case was submitted for every one of the > blackboard bold etc letters in the mathematical set; merely the use of > blackboard bold for a general purpose of denoting sets such as the > naturals, reals, complex

Re: Fwd: Why incomplete subscript/superscript alphabet ?

2016-10-07 Thread Oren Watson
Hmm... "filling in Latin alphabet encoding gaps without clear use cases" is exactly what was done for the blackboard bold letters. I scarcely think that a use case was submitted for every one of the blackboard bold etc letters in the mathematical set; merely the use of blackboard bold for a

Re: Fwd: Why incomplete subscript/superscript alphabet ?

2016-10-07 Thread Ken Whistler
On 10/7/2016 11:25 AM, Oren Watson wrote: Would it be appropriate to submit an omnibus proposal for encoding all remaining english letters in subscript, small caps, and superscript in the SMP for the purpose of not arbitrarily constraining the use of unicode for new linguistic theories and

Fwd: Why incomplete subscript/superscript alphabet ?

2016-10-07 Thread Oren Watson
Would it be appropriate to submit an omnibus proposal for encoding all remaining english letters in subscript, small caps, and superscript in the SMP for the purpose of not arbitrarily constraining the use of unicode for new linguistic theories and ideas, similar to the mathematical characters?

Re: Fwd: Why incomplete subscript/superscript alphabet ?

2016-10-06 Thread Jukka K. Korpela
6.10.2016, 19:27, Ken Whistler wrote: Their functions have been completely overtaken by markup conventions such as ... and ..., which *are* widely supported already, even in most email clients, ri^ght out of the b_ox . They are widely supported, but very widely in a typographically inferior

Fwd: Fwd: Why incomplete subscript/superscript alphabet ?

2016-10-06 Thread Oren Watson
I meant, petition say the devs of Konsole, iTerm, xterm etc, and other programs which deal purely in plain text to support 8b and 8c characters for formatting. Markup doesn't exist everywhere. On Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 12:27 PM, Ken Whistler wrote: > > > On 10/6/2016 9:04 AM,

Re: Fwd: Why incomplete subscript/superscript alphabet ?

2016-10-06 Thread Ken Whistler
On 10/6/2016 9:04 AM, Oren Watson wrote: If this is a real need, why not petition more software to allow the use of the U+8C partial line up and U+8B partial line down characters for the this purpose? Because U+008C and U+008B are relics from the days when control codes were used in

Fwd: Why incomplete subscript/superscript alphabet ?

2016-10-06 Thread Oren Watson
-- Forwarded message -- From: Oren Watson Date: Thu, Oct 6, 2016 at 12:03 PM Subject: Re: Why incomplete subscript/superscript alphabet ? To: "Jukka K. Korpela" If this is a real need, why not petition more software to allow the use of