D. Starner scripsit: > But he also uses a turned c-cedilla. Should it be encoded as a new character
Possibly. > Or should a turned combining cedilla be encoded, Not if this is the only use of it, I think. > or is U+0312 just that? It's similar, but the combining class of U+0312 is 230, indicating that it is a detached diacritic rather than attached like a cedilla. If it were attached, it would belong to the currently empty combining class 214. > (If it were my language, I wouldn't be happy with > U+0312, but I doubt anyone is attached enough to Dorsey's orthography to > care about the difference.) Not even Dorsey, it seems; his field notes are in a different orthography altogether, and the "Dorsey orthography" of his publications was apparently imposed on him by the BAE and its printers. -- "Take two turkeys, one goose, four John Cowan cabbages, but no duck, and mix them http://www.ccil.org/~cowan together. After one taste, you'll duck [EMAIL PROTECTED] soup the rest of your life." http://www.reutershealth.com --Groucho
