Agreed with Yifán Wáng... But I wonder about the need for the character in the first place. Are we going to add a full small-caps set, too, given its use in morphological glosses? Isn't it enough to use a regular 'Q' in plain-text, and style to small caps in rich text?
I can see the rationale for mathematical bold, given that a regular-weight plain-text character would stand for a different thing in mathematical formulæ. But there's no way a capital Q would ever be confused as anything other than the phoneme, in a Japanese phonological transcription. 2016/12/25 17:56 "Yifán Wáng" <[email protected]>: Please excuse my serial posting. I recently noticed the subhead given to the LATIN LETTER SMALL CAPITAL Q in the following document (at A7AF) is "Letter for representation of morpheme in Japanese". http://www.unicode.org/L2/L2016/16381-n4778r-pdam1-2-charts.pdf However, to my knowledge, the letter is required for describing a "phoneme" of Japanese that isn't tied to specific "morphemes" (~ "words"). I have contacted the original writer of the proposal: http://www.unicode.org/L2/L2015/15241-small-cap-q.pdf and he agrees with me in this regard. Thus I suppose "Letter for Japanese phonology" would be more desired a heading for this character, though subheads are not normative. What are your thoughts?
