From: "Mark E. Shoulson" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > On 01/05/04 08:04, Philippe Verdy wrote: > > Regarding dotless-i-with hook... > > >and case mappings with each other. Both solutions maintains the distinction > >with Latin oi (gha) and with the latin soft sign (small b). > > > Can we leave OI/gha out of this? Near as I can tell the *only* > relevance it has to the discussion of the hookbottomed-i is that it > happened to be mentioned in the same message once. It doesn't look, > sound, smell, or taste like the hookbottom-i, and should in no wise be > conflated, unified, or otherwise made to cohabit with it.
Certainly, but that's not me who suggested to unify the "i with bottom right hook" as a variant of "oi/gha". In fact if you read what I read, I have exactly said the opposite, because I have always thought that "oi/gha" was a variant of "g" and not of "i"... Look at the summary of sounds with "similar" glyphs I posted early, then this is very clear... This summary was needed because the GIF posted by Peter was not found in the list (Peter just posted a plain-text description, but the table he created was not usable as all the column formatting was lost from his post...) Instead Peter could post a URL to his interesting Azeri alphabets which compares the transliteration schemes that occured in different reforms from Arabic to Latin then Cyrillic then agains Latin.
