Re: Additional diacritics (was: Phonological equivalent of...)

T. A. McLeay ikrih:

| > Moreover I think b\ and p\ should be (re)assigned to
| > U+0238 LATIN SMALL LETTER DB DIGRAPH and U+0239 LATIN
| > SMALL LETTER QP DIGRAPH
|
| Now that idea I am wholly against. It's one thing to redefine an
| unrecommended symbol when there's perceived to be a problem. It's
| another thing to redefine a default symbol for something to a
| character that isn't even standard IPA.

I agree with Tristan.

Anyway, it seems that the CXS custodians disagree about further amendents. I
am sure the stability is the main positive feature of CXS. Last additions
like [i\] for [1], [;] for palatalization etc. were made by extensive usage.
So, if one wants a symbol to be used, let him use it, and specify what it
means, untill the community sees the advantages or at least start
understanding what you mean. At the same time, apply common sense and avoid
radicalism. Stability is the best guarantee that we will be able to
understand one another. Remember the tower of Babel ! :)

Dixi.

-- Yitzik

Reply