From the article:
> These digraphs owe their existence in Unicode not to Hungarian but to Serbo-Croatian. Serbo-Croatian is written in both Latin script (Croatian) and Cyrillic script (Serbian), and these digraphs permit one-to-one transliteration between them.¹
Yes, buuuut Serbo-Croatian obviously has those 3 cases too, so he could have made the post much clearer by leaving out Hungarian and only focusing on Serbo-Croatian (or mentioning Hungarian only as an aside). I mean, if three of these four digraphs don't even exist in Hungarian, and "dz" is the only encoded Hungarian digraph, it's pretty obvious that the fact that it was encoded is only a coincidence?
Yeah, but then why bring up Hungarian (which has very little in common with Serbo-Croatian, although spoken in a neighboring country) in the first place?