Fwd: Why incomplete subscript/superscript alphabet ?

[Ken Whistler]

On 10/6/2016 9:04 AM, Oren Watson wrote:
> If this is a real need, why not petition more software to allow the 
> use of the U+8C partial line up and U+8B partial line down characters 
> for the this purpose?
>

Because U+008C and U+008B are relics from the days when control codes 
were used in terminal control protocols and to drive print trains in 
devices like this:

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Line_printer#/media/File:IBM_line_printer_1403.JPG

Their functions have been completely overtaken by markup conventions 
such as <sub>...</sub> and <sup>...</sup>, which *are* widely supported 
already, even in most email clients, ri^ght out of the b_ox .

And I suspect that Yucca's statement "so it would usually be best to 
give up the superscripting idea here" is intended to mean give up on 
asking for a separately encoded superscript character for each Latin 
letter, including accented ones (or applying accents to separately 
encoded superscript letters). Because, after all, this stuff already 
just works: «3^ème » (and not «3ᵉ̀ᵐᵉ», by the way!).

--Ken
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://unicode.org/pipermail/unicode/attachments/20161006/8bb85b7d/attachment.html>