Nope, we decided to do it the correct and logical way for our alphabet. Some glyphs are either dotted or dotless. So, we have Iı, İi, Oo, Öö, Uu, Üü, Cc, Çç, Ss and Şş. You see the Ii pair is actually the odd one in the series.

Also, we don't have serifs in our I. It's just a straight line. So, it's not even related to your Ii pair in English. You can't dictate how we write our straight lines, can you.

The root cause of the problem is in the implementation and standardization of the computer systems. Computers are originally designed only for English alphabet in mind. And patched to support other languages over time, poorly. Computers should obey the language rules, not the other way around.

Yep, but you decided to abuse Latin alphabet instead of creating your own code page with your own letters and with your own rules.

We created our own letters and our own rules. In 1928, long before code pages and computers.

The assumption that letters come in universal pairs is wrong. That assumption is the bug. You can’t assume that capitalization rules must be the same for every language implementing a specific alphabet. Those rules may change for every language. They do.

And not just capitalization rules. Auto complete, for instance, should respect the language as well. You can’t “correct” a French word to an English word. Localization is not optional when dealing with text.

Do all the letters have separate unicode codepoints? (no reuse Latin ones?)

[deleted]

>Also, we don't have serifs in our I.

That depends on font.

>So, it's not even related to your Ii pair in English.

Modern Turkish uses the Latin script, of course it's related.

>You can't dictate how we write our straight lines, can you.

No, I can't, I just want to understand why the Turks decided to change this letter, and this letter only, from the rest of the standard Latin script/diacritics.

> I just want to understand why the Turks decided to change this letter, and this letter only

Because Turkish uses a phonetic alphabet suited for Turkish sounds, based on latin letters. There are 8 vovels come in two subsets:

AIOU and EİÖÜ.

When you pair them with zip(), pairs are phonetically related sounds but totally different letters at the same time. Turkish also uses suffixes for everything, and vowels in these suffixes sometimes change between these two subgroups.

This design lets me write any word uniquely and almost correctly using the Turkish alphabet.

Dis dizayn lets mi rayt ani vörd yüniğkli end olmost koreğtkli yuzing dı törkiş alfabet.

Ö is the dotted version of O. İ is the dotted version of I. Related but different. Their lower case versions are logically (not by historical convention): öoiı. So we didn’t just wanted to change I, and only I. We just added dots. Since there are no Oö pair in any language our OoÖö vovels didn’t get the same attention. Same for our Ğğ and Şş.

I hope this answers the question.

> Computers are originally designed only for English alphabet in mind.

Computers are originally designed for no alphabet at all. They only have two symbols.

ASCII is a set of operating codes that includes instructions to physically move different parts of a mechanical typewriter. It was already a mistake when it was used for computer displays.

Note that ASCII stands for "American Standard Code for Information Interchange". There's no expectation here that this is a suitable code for any language other than English, the de-facto language of the United States of America.

Does the situation change in Unicode?