> Actually, the Sharp-S is derived from a ligature of U+017F followed by U+0292,
> and I suggest to add a remark to U+00DF saying so.
As I stated earlier this week, the editors would appreciate a
respite from suggestions for things to go into the book.
That said, I appreciate the scholarly elucidation of the history of
the ligature for sharp-s.
However, the book is going out with a short note that reflects
Jan Tschichold's view (U+017F + U+0073). Further discussion of whether
this is correct, or whether the ligature derives from U+017F + U+0292
(which I consider problematical, since 0292 is a fairly recent
characters), or from U+017F + U+007A in a handwritten German form that
looks like 0292, belongs elsewhere -- perhaps in a book on the history
of Latin characters and typography. The Unicode Standard is not the
place to resolve squabbles between eminent philologists and renowned
* tosses note on pile of things to think about for Unicode 4.0 *
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:51 EDT