Re: Latin capital letter Is (Ꝭ)

Denis Jacquerye via Unicode unicode at
Sun Mar 3 07:20:02 CST 2019

The original proposal N3027 L2/06-027 has a section titled “Case-pairing”
which says the following:
Most of the casing pairs shown below are attested in the examples. Those
which are not, fall into two categories: those for which no capital can be
constructed (such as LONG S) and those for which natural capitals can be
easily formed. [...] Because of the general structural feature of the Latin
script (from a theoretical point of view), and in order to facilitate
modern casing operations for these letters, we have judged it appropriate
to supply case-pairs for all the letters which admit of them. In a
scholarly publication, for instance, an article title at the top of a
journal page might be set in all caps; it would be nonsensical for all but
one or two of the medievalist Latin letters to be able to be cased with an
all caps command. (This precedent was set with the encoding of the archaic
Coptic extensions.)

On Fri, 1 Mar 2019 at 15:29, Fredrick Brennan via Unicode <
unicode at> wrote:

> Hello friends,
> I sent this query to Michael Everson directly on Feb. 19 but did not hear
> anything back. I assume that he was too busy to respond, perhaps I even
> broke some unwritten rule of etiquette, for which I apologize; so I am
> hoping that someone on the mailing list knows the answer instead.
> I am the author of an open source blackletter typeface based on, but not
> exactly the same as, the typeface used in the 1611 King James Bible and
> facsimile reproductions of the same named in homage "KJV1611
> <>". Although named such, I include
> as many glyphs as I can whether they existed in the 1611 KJV or not, as
> long as they were used in English blackletter typesetting generally.
> I am trying to find examples of the glyph encoded as U+A76C (Ꝭ), the
> so-called Latin Capital Letter Is. I have found ample proof
> <>
>  and examples of its younger brother, the so-called Latin Small Letter Is
> encoded as U+A76D (ꝭ).
> I checked Everson's proposal
> <> to encode
> these letters, and unfortunately found there no proof of the existence of
> the capital variant. Is it a dreaded Unicode-ism
> <>?
> How should I handle this in my font?
> Best,
> Fredrick Brennan

Denis Moyogo Jacquerye
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <>

More information about the Unicode mailing list