If you can dot an ‘i’, you can presumably undot it.  You may think this is ‘pointless’, but it could be appropriate in some circumstances, e.g. if you are writing in Turkish where i’s can be dotted or undotted.  (You see, the adjectival form already exists.)  And “I accidentally rubbed out the dot over the ‘i’” is not as concise as “I accidentally undotted the ‘i’”.

That certainly appeals to my senses..you certainly are terse ACB..what made you learn Turkish?

For not only does Turkish Romanized orthography have both upper & lower case dotless i with majuscule typeface no different than Western capital I and, together with its minuscule ı counterpart, pronounced according to modern IPA ɯ symbol as the close back e in standard English “open”. . . [v. my complete post further down infra]

Only an idedot would undot an i.

For not only does Turkish Romanized orthography have both upper & lower case dotless i with majuscule typeface no different than Western capital I and, together with its minuscule ı counterpart, pronounced according to modern IPA ɯ symbol as the close back e in standard English “open” but common household vocabulary “dot” once thought to be a severe phonetic corruption of vulgar language “tit” much as familiar idiom tit for tat may originally hail from pristine & uncorrupted tip for tap yet presents one very compelling argument for this Biblical or Tiberian Hebrew etymology: plural grammatical term נְקֻדּוֹת nəquddôṯ = tiny diacritical signs to assist in orthoepic pronunciation of retrograde Hebrew script and, with some inverted truncation, also to signify “dots” with logical back formation “dot” again confirmed from above nəquddôṯ.

See also the recent thread on ‘Tittle’.

It seems that a script can be untittled as well as untitled.

January 1, 09: really tittled some conversation.