Pr. Dr. Werner König (who created the symbol x with long leg, etc.)
confirmed that what is being used in TeuTEX is really a dialectology
chi directly from the Teuthonista journal's transcription, and not a
newly created symbol from stretching Latin x like assumed in the
proposal N4106 that was
On 8 Jun 2012, at 01:52, Jean-François Colson wrote:
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 +
Julian, if you look closely, it is not actually a turned s, but something
created with a turned s in mind. In the very sort of the alphabet, the
regular s has equal (or near-equal) top and bottom bowls. the turned one
has an emphasized upper bowl, which of course stems from the idea of a
turned s
Szelp, A. Sz. wrote:
Julian, if you look closely, it is not actually a turned s, but something
created with a turned s in mind. In the very sort of the alphabet, the
regular s has equal (or near-equal) top and bottom bowls. the turned one
has an emphasized upper bowl, which of course stems from
But if that linked image contains the full alphabet, then there is no
regular d, which would be confusable with the rotated p. So in fact,
Yes, there is. Try reading the paragraph at the bottom of the page.
--
The University of Edinburgh is a charitable body, registered in
Scotland, with
Am Donnerstag, 7. Juni 2012 um 22:54 schrieb David Starner:
DS On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 8:41 AM, Julian Bradfield
DS jcb+unic...@inf.ed.ac.uk wrote:
Surely there is no basis for distiguishing characters solely on
the basis of weights that are an artefact of the writing device -
nobody would
Le 08/06/12 10:13, Michael Everson a écrit :
On 8 Jun 2012, at 01:52, Jean-François Colson wrote:
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
of any other
characters.
Peter
From: unicode-bou...@unicode.org [mailto:unicode-bou...@unicode.org] On Behalf
Of Jean-François Colson
Sent: 08 June 2012 04:32
To: unicode@unicode.org
Subject: Re: Latin chi and stretched x
Le 08/06/12 10:13, Michael Everson a écrit :
On 8 Jun 2012, at 01:52, Jean
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 10:54 PM, David Starner prosfil...@gmail.com 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.
(It's not Dorsey's fault; apparently
You are right, the s-acute just below it confused me.
--
Szelp, André Szabolcs
+43 (650) 79 22 400
On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 11:32 AM, Julian Bradfield
jcb+unic...@inf.ed.ac.ukwrote:
Szelp, A. Sz. wrote:
Julian, if you look closely, it is not actually a turned s, but something
created with a
On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Denis Jacquerye moy...@gmail.com wrote:
Are you sure it's not the opposite? Dorsey had a typewriter that
didn't have his turned letters, so he used crossed lines below to
indicate what letters should be turned when printed.
I don't have a source to refer to,
On 2012-06-08, David Starner prosfil...@gmail.com wrote:
On Fri, Jun 8, 2012 at 11:39 AM, Denis Jacquerye moy...@gmail.com wrote:
Are you sure it's not the opposite? Dorsey had a typewriter that
didn't have his turned letters, so he used crossed lines below to
indicate what letters should be
and stretched-x do not.
It is also very likely that the Latin chi and the stretched x will be
used in the same environment. Both are phonetic letters, and are
likely to occur in the same texts especially when somebody presents
their transcription of Teuthonista sources into IPA.
This means
On 2012-06-07, Denis Jacquerye moy...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 12:39 AM, Karl Pentzlin karl-pentz...@acssoft.de
I agree, we should avoid bad typography. But isn't a Latin chi (the
IPA Latin chi being proposed) with Greek weights instead of Latin
weights bad typography? Probably,
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 1:16 AM, Michael Everson ever...@evertype.com wrote:
On 6 Jun 2012, at 08:55, Szelp, A. Sz. wrote:
but it's Michael himself who's recognized that Teuthonista suffers from a
good deal of extraordinarily bad typography, which shows us, that the
different stroke weight
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 5:41 PM, Julian Bradfield
jcb+unic...@inf.ed.ac.uk wrote:
On 2012-06-07, Denis Jacquerye moy...@gmail.com wrote:
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 12:39 AM, Karl Pentzlin karl-pentz...@acssoft.de
I agree, we should avoid bad typography. But isn't a Latin chi (the
IPA Latin chi
On Thu, Jun 7, 2012 at 8:41 AM, Julian Bradfield
jcb+unic...@inf.ed.ac.uk wrote:
Surely there is no basis for distiguishing characters solely on
the basis of weights that are an artefact of the writing device -
nobody would propose using or encoding LATIN SMALL LETTER REVERSED O,
I hope.
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
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,
unified in the first place.
Furthermore, the Latin capital Chi is being proposed based on Lepsius'
capital Chi which glyphs are strictly different from that one proposed.
Yes, but it is still essentially a Latin Chi, not a Latin Stretched X. It is
clearly not a Greek Chi, because Greek Chi does
, otherwise U+0066 LATIN SMALL LETTER F
and U+0192 LATIN SMALL LETTER F WITH HOOK had to be regarded as being
the same letter also.
It is also very likely that the Latin chi and the stretched x will be
used in the same environment. Both are phonetic letters, and are
likely to occur in the same texts
On 6 Jun 2012, at 08:55, Szelp, A. Sz. wrote:
but it's Michael himself who's recognized that Teuthonista suffers from a
good deal of extraordinarily bad typography, which shows us, that the
different stroke weight distribution is actually just bad typography.
This is incorrect. Teuthonista
On 6 Jun 2012, at 08:55, Szelp, A. Sz. wrote:
but it's Michael himself who's recognized that Teuthonista suffers from a
good deal of extraordinarily bad typography, which shows us, that the
different stroke weight distribution is actually just bad typography.
This is incorrect. Teuthonista
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 10:16 AM, Michael Everson ever...@evertype.com wrote:
What is your point, though?
Latin stretched x has been accepted based on examples with an Italic
glyph like Lepsius' chi, a glyph like Greek chi and a stretched x
taller than x-height (and not below baseline). All these
My apologies to Everson. This was clearly intended to be private. I
failed to notice the full title.
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Denis Jacquerye moy...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 10:16 AM, Michael Everson ever...@evertype.com wrote:
...
--
Denis Moyogo Jacquerye
African
Too late now.
On 4 Jun 2012, at 10:25, Denis Jacquerye wrote:
My apologies to Everson. This was clearly intended to be private. I
failed to notice the full title.
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 11:04 AM, Denis Jacquerye moy...@gmail.com wrote:
On Mon, Jun 4, 2012 at 10:16 AM, Michael Everson
chi is any different from Teuthonista's multiple
stretched x? Both use the glyph of Greek chi sometimes, and other glyphs
other times.
Stretched x is an x, not anything else. In its origin, they stretched a Latin
x. Latin chi is borrowed from Greek chi, but in Lepsius uses a unique capital
that one proposed.
Yes, but it is still essentially a Latin Chi, not a Latin Stretched X. It is
clearly not a Greek Chi, because Greek Chi does not use that shape for its
capital. Lepsius, and the IPA, explicitly disunified Latin Chi from Greek,
and I would say that both Lepsius and IPA
Hi,
There are some issues with the stretched x that has been accepted from
N4081 (Revised proposal to encode “Teuthonista” phonetic characters in
the UCS) and N4106 (Teuthonista ad hoc report) and the proposed Latin
chi from N4262 (Proposal to encode “Unifon” and other characters in
the UCS).
29 matches
Mail list logo
