0027, 02BC, 2019, or a new character?

Garth Wallace via Unicode unicode at unicode.org
Tue Feb 20 19:15:52 CST 2018

AIUI "doesn't look like Turkish" was one of the design criteria, for
political reasons.

On Tue, Feb 20, 2018 at 1:07 PM Michael Everson via Unicode <
unicode at unicode.org> wrote:

> Not using Turkic letters is daft, particularly as there was a widely-used
> transliteration in Kazakhstan anyway. And even if not Ç Ş, they could have
> used Ć and Ś.
> There’s no value in using diagraphs in Kazakh particularly when there
> could be a one-to-one relation with the Cyrillic orthography, and I bet you
> anything there will be ambiguity where some morpheme ends in -s and the
> next begins with h- where you have [sx] and not [ʃ].
> Groan.
> > On 20 Feb 2018, at 20:40, Christoph Päper <christoph.paeper at crissov.de>
> wrote:
> >
> > Michael Everson:
> >> Why on earth would they use Ch and Sh when 1) C isn’t used by itself
> and 2) if you’re using Ǵǵ you may as well use Çç Şş.
> >
> > I would have argued in favor of digraphs for G' and N' as well if there
> already was a decision for Ch and Sh.
> >
> > Many European orthographies use the digraph Qu although the letter Q
> does not occur otherwise.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://unicode.org/pipermail/unicode/attachments/20180221/3b37c264/attachment.html>

More information about the Unicode mailing list