Unicode 11 Georgian uppercase vs. fonts
Alexey Ostrovsky via Unicode
unicode at unicode.org
Fri Jul 27 12:26:05 CDT 2018
On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 5:02 PM, Michael Everson via Unicode <
unicode at unicode.org> wrote:
> > Then how can you prove it is a case and not a stylistic variation? Let's
> compare with a case of Hebrew or Arabic, for example.
> Well, go ahead. Compare it. Show some example of Hebrew or Arabic that is
> consistent with the evidence we have shown.
> 1) Show evidence of titlecasing in Hebrew or Arabic.
> 2) Show evidence of ALL CAPS in Hebrew or Arabic.
> 3) Show evidence of small caps in Hebrew or Arabic.
> You won’t be able to, because there is no case in Hebrew or Arabic.
>
This implicitly asserts that caps are shown on the samples in N4712. But
casing means there is a distinction between upper and lower case, however
§8 of N4712 actually re-affirms that there is no distinction in Georgian.
that is exactly what I am talking about: I do not see how the assumed
existence of cases in the modern(!!) Georgian (please, do not refer to
those 19th-century samples here, I am asking about the modern script state)
is following from N4712.
> The structure of the Georgian script is casing. The modern standard
> orthographic use made of case is unique to Georgian. This was easy to
> describe.
>
There is no orthographic use of case in the modern Georgian. Emphatic,
casual, expressive -- yes, but not orthographic. Neither N4712 shows that,
nor you provide an example here.
> N4712 describes the two kinds of orthographic rules which have been used
> for Georgian. To summarize again:
> A) Modern Georgian orthography uses lowercase letters always, unless
> uppercase letters are used in which all the letters in the word are
> uppercase.
>
This brings us back to the question of caps vs. stylistic variation. So,
better to leave it to the first thread (if any).
> > What do you mean by "orthographic", by the way -- simply a habit of
> writing, or whether a written text is correct or not?
> “Orthography” is the same thing as “spelling”.
>
Then yes, my points are correct.
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://unicode.org/pipermail/unicode/attachments/20180727/519b3f32/attachment.html>
More information about the Unicode
mailing list