<html><head></head><body style="word-wrap: break-word; -webkit-nbsp-mode: space; -webkit-line-break: after-white-space; "><img id="b40982c2-5f2c-4055-a79b-00459c63a45e" height="871" width="991" apple-width="yes" apple-height="yes" src="cid:39CA91B2-A316-4F28-977C-BD0508B0EFFA"><div><br></div><div><font class="Apple-style-span" color="#3a00fc" style="font-size: 24px;"><u>On 2 Mar 2012, at 4:36, Don Killian wrote:<br></u></font></div><div><font class="Apple-style-span" color="#3a00fc"><br></font></div><div><font class="Apple-style-span" color="#3a00fc">Why is changing Unicode not an option?<br><br>There are two distinct symbols in the IPA, a (open unrounded front vowel) and ɑ (open unrounded back vowel). When IPA was introduced into Unicode, a character position was created for ɑ (U+0251), but not for the front vowel a. Instead, Unicode reused the normal latin small letter a, and as an unfortunate coincidence, italic latin a resembles roman ɑ.<br><br>There are two potential solutions.<br><br>One is for typographers to create fonts where italic versions of a and ɑ look different. This then means that italicized English and other Metatext languages will also do the same, if you don't change the font for those, but I don't think this should be too upsetting for people in general, and I do see this as a potential solution, particularly in the short term.<br><br>However, I do see a solution from Unicode as well. It is not to apply for a separate italic symbol, which I agree is not sensible.<br><br>Instead, we should have a character to represent the open unrounded front vowel a, so that typographers can specify its italic shape to not resemble ɑ, and small latin a can still resemble ɑ in italics if needed. Despite the long list of already existing "a"s, I don't see them as sufficient, and it shouldn't be a problem to add a character to the IPA extensions. Unicode has done something similar with U+0067 g and U+0261 ɡ (and numerous other examples), which also resemble each other, so it wouldn't be the first time.<br><br>In fact this should have been done which IPA was added to Unicode in the first place, instead of taking a shortcut with the normal latin small letter a.<br><br>Your argument could very well be used here identically:<br><br>> From the perspective of UNICODE, the "a" and "ɑ" are simply two<br>> different characters. If you put them in italics, they are still two<br>> different characters (even if they might look similar)<br><br>From the perspective of a linguist, a (small latin a) and a (front open unrounded vowel) are simply two different characters, even if they might look similar. They also deserve two different points.<br><br>Best,<br><br>Don<br></font>
<br></div></body></html>