Unicode 11 Georgian uppercase vs. fonts

Alexey Ostrovsky via Unicode unicode at unicode.org
Fri Jul 27 12:07:30 CDT 2018

On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 4:55 PM, Michael Everson via Unicode <
unicode at unicode.org> wrote:

> >> You have me to thank for undoing that mistake. And some other mistakes.
> We all make mistakes.
> > I would like to avoid personal discussions if possible.
> You are addressing the author of N2608R2 and N4712. I will say what I want
> about the documents I wrote and the ideas in them.

If you wish... Do you insist that I have to thank you? :)))
OK, sorry, I will simply ignore personal notes from now.

> > Could you please comment how the samples in photos prove that it is not
> small caps?
> Where, in N4712? There are NO EXAMPLES of small caps in N4712. To use
> Latin examples (with explicitly-encoded Latin small caps:

I mean stylistic variation (we can call it "small caps" for short, or
somehow else, it does not matter as long as we address things and not
words). Could you please comment how the samples in photos in N4712 prove
that what you call "uppercase" or "all caps" is not a stylistic variation
in modern Georgian?

> N4712 does not contain analysis on that, only statements. (Simple
> assertions that it is correct will add nothing to what is already stated in
> N4712.)
> If you want to continue this line of argument, you have to cite individual
> Figures in N4712 and say what you think about them. The analysis in N4712
> is sound, and convinced the Georgian authorities and the UTC to encode the
> characters which have been encoded.

There is no analysis in N4712, only description of the samples.
Figs. 7-12 demonstrate casual cases (3 for titles and 3 for truly casual
cases), other samples are not relevant. None of them demonstrates an
example when casing is orthographically motivated.

> Also, note that the quote was made to demonstrate that N4712 denies what
> was stated in N2608R2, introduces some changes, and then re-asserts some of
> denied statements.
> I am the author of N4712. I deny what I stated in N2608R2, of which I am
> the author. What I said in N2608R2 was based on a mistaken analysis.

And then you introduced cases and re-affirmed some of the denied statements
in the same N4712 (§8). This is what I wrote and not only the part of the
conjunction that you addressed.

> The mistake in interpretation is yours. Here:
> > 1) Latin script cases. It has capital letters and small letters.
> Is this true? Yes or no.

If it is necessary that I reaffirm trivial things for the Latin script,
then yes, of course, I agree. How this relates to Georgian?

> > 2) Georgian script cases. It has capital letters and small letters.
> > 2a) When Georgian orthography uses capital letters it uses them on every
> letter in the word where they are used, regardless of what kind of word it
> is.
> > This is the same as small caps style, it cannot be used to assert
> existence of cases.
> It is not, for two reasons. First, small caps is pretty much writing
> capital letters the height of small letters. In the UCS, you can apply
> small caps styling to Adlam, Armenian, Cherokee, Coptic, Cyrillic, Deseret,
> Glagolitic, Greek, Khutsuri Latin, Ol Chiki, Old Hungarian — and now
> Georgian.

We have a problem with terminology here. When I mention "small caps" in
this context (i.e. Georgian), I mean a parallel with Latin small caps, i.e.
that it is a stylistic variation and not a separate feature of the script.
Being precise, the correct way would be to introduce a special "mtavruli"
styling for Mkhedruli.

> 2b) In the 19th and early 20th century there was an orthography which
> used capital letters at the beginnings of sentences and of names, as well
> as full-word ALL CAPS.
> >
> > No, there were attempts in some books.
> Yes, and those books are things. They are facts. They can be read. Now,
> they can be transcribed accurately in Unicode.

This is accurate and I agree. But I do not think it is enough to introduce
an extinct feature in the modern(!!!) script.

> > This is the key statement. How can you prove that?
> 1) In 19th and early 20th-century texts they are not mixing small caps
> with Mkhedruli. They are writing Mtavruli, not ᴍtavruli.

We need to select somehow what state of the Georgian script we describe —
the modern one, or that marginal attempts from the end of 19th c. For the
modern one it is irrelevant.

> 2) There can be no small caps style without encoded capital letters.

I used "small caps", as I mentioned before, to address a case of stylistic
variation (following the wording of N2608R2, as I mentioned before). How
can you prove that Mtavruli is casing motivated orthographically and not a
stylistic variation?

> There is no problem. There was a problem. I and my Georgian colleagues
> Nika Gujejiani and Akaki Razmadze solved it, working with others, garnering
> consensus, and now it is done. It cannot be undone. Live with it.

FYI, §11.3 of N4712 postulates a fake reality: «There is no opposition in
Georgia to the model proposed here.» There is no consensus, and not
everyone agrees. But this goes beyond the scope of this discussion.

-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://unicode.org/pipermail/unicode/attachments/20180727/868b6f78/attachment.html>

More information about the Unicode mailing list