The Turkish İ Problem and Why You Should Care

https://haacked.com/archive/2012/07/05/turkish-i-problem-and-why-you-should-care.aspx/

8 points · 3 comments · view on lemmy.world

3 Comments

matj1@lemmy.world · 2 pts · 1y (1 reply)

I think that Unicode implements Turkish wrong. I tried to make a proposal to Unicode, but, when I gave that for checking to someone involved in Unicode, I was told that such proposal would be futile because Unicode can't break compatibility.

Presently, there is a case pair of I where the small I is dotted, and the capital I is dotless, then there are separate dotless small I and dotted capital I. My proposal was that the common case pair of I would have unspecified dottedness, and there would be a separate case pair of dotted I and a pair of dotless I for Turkish.

This was done with the idea that, in most languages, dottedness of I is just a typographic choice similar to the shape of small A. My proposal would enable fonts where small I is by default dotless like in the Carolingian minuscule but which support Turkish.

threeganzi@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 1y

Does Unicode define case pair relationships of glyphs? My understanding was that it doesn’t and in that case it doesn’t matter.l, right. But I’m sure I’m wrong :)

Not sure I understand what you want these fonts to be able to do. Isn’t that already possible regardless of approach?

threeganzi@sh.itjust.works · 1 pts · 1y

I skimmed the article and not sure I understand the problem. Turkey has some additional glyphs variant of i. So what?