Fwd: Why incomplete subscript/superscript alphabet ?

Ken Whistler kenwhistler at att.net
Fri Oct 7 13:53:16 CDT 2016

On 10/7/2016 11:25 AM, Oren Watson wrote:
> Would it be appropriate to submit an omnibus proposal for encoding all 
> remaining english letters in subscript, small caps, and superscript in 
> the SMP for the purpose of not arbitrarily constraining the use of 
> unicode for new linguistic theories and ideas, similar to the 
> mathematical characters?

I don't see that the use of Unicode characters for new linguistic 
theories and ideas is arbitrarily constrained as it stands. So no, I 
don't think it make sense to submit such a proposal on spec. I don't 
understand peoples' fascination with multiplying the encoding of the 
Latin alphabet A-Z over and over and over again. Modifier letters are 
different from the mathematical styled alphabets -- modifier letters 
include many letters and symbols beyond A-Z, and there isn't any clear 
marginal benefit in trying to "complete" their set somehow by filling in 
Latin alphabet encoding gaps without clear use cases.


More information about the Unicode mailing list