Unicode 11 Georgian uppercase vs. fonts

Alexey Ostrovsky via Unicode unicode at unicode.org
Fri Jul 27 12:30:50 CDT 2018

On Fri, Jul 27, 2018 at 5:04 PM, Michael Everson via Unicode <
unicode at unicode.org> wrote:

> > It is in present continuous tense, so, samples from 19th century are not
> valid. (They are probably also not valid formally, but I have to check
> those books first.)
> What is “formal validity”? Those books exist. They are facts. We analyse
> material in order to describe the structure of scripts.

Yes, and for that we need to see a full book and corresponding materials of
that book, not only sOME eXAMPLE. If the book does not follow the same
convention for other text, then there is a question. (I am not trying to
construct something artificial here just to argue with you, I just saw
enough books from 19th century to understand how they are formatted
usually, that is why I mean I need to check it. However, I do realize that
there is no interest in that at all.)
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://unicode.org/pipermail/unicode/attachments/20180727/57afc451/attachment.html>

More information about the Unicode mailing list