> From: [EMAIL PROTECTED] [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] On Behalf > Of Ernest Cline
> But that specific use is the same as the use of the reversed t, h > ligature that the i.t.a. uses and the proposed U+0246 (LATIN > SMALL LIGATURE ITALIC TH) from N2656. While all three > have different glyphs, they all represent a voiced th in English, > and it is extremely unlikely that any document would use more > than one such form. By that logic, both the proposed 0246 and your i.t.a. ligature can be unified with U+00F0, which is the character used in the IPA convention to represent a voiced th in English. Problem is, it's not good logic. Unicode encodes characters, not orthographic functions. There may be a problem with unnecessary proliferation of inconsistent conventions for representing a particular phoneme of a given language (one dictionary does this while another does that), but that is not a problem that should be solved by unifying the different graphic representation into a single character that is defined in terms of an orthographic function. Peter Peter Constable Globalization Infrastructure and Font Technologies Microsoft Windows Division
