On 2/17/2013 12:30 AM, Stephan Stiller wrote:
But I have to ask one more thing:
Since the latter is expected to be rare, I personally would be
comfortable with making a code point for it, so that fonts like this,
which are actually used, can be mapped to Unicode w/o forcing people
into weird fallbacks over a rare character.
Why would that be so? I thought your normal way of doing things is
require attestation of a particular usage. If a character is more
frequent, it's more likely we're convinced of its being used in a
particular way.
Law of diminishing returns.
I think it's a waste of everybody's time to even contemplate forcing
"fallback" transformations (which are a pain to program) when perfectly
straightforward capital form can be deduced, and has been deduced (at
least by font creators - we don't know what user requests they based
their work on).
Casing irregularities are expensive compared to adding a code point for
a rare character.
A./
