From: Pim Blokland (email@example.com)
Date: Thu May 01 2003 - 11:16:59 EDT
Kent Karlsson schreef:
> For Dutch, ÿ (y-diaeresis) can be used instead of ij.
No, no! No matter how many examples you may have seen of ij being
represented as ÿ, it still is not correct.
It may have been caused by people who a) thought they were
interchangable, because in handwriting (and in script fonts) the
letter combination i + j looks very much like ÿ, or b) desperately
tried to use a single glyph for the ij digraph and didn't have
U+0133 at their disposal, only U+00FF (the latter being much more
> So <ij-ligature, double acute> seems also to be a reasonable way
of acute-accenting an ij-ligature.
Only with fonts that support that kind of combination, as you said.
Without help from the font, you get the dotted i and j with the
acutes superimposed on the dots. Horrible!
Besides, call me ignorant, but I'm not sure if the Hungarian umlaut
has the same meaning as two consecutive acute stress marks, and if
it's allowed to be used only because it looks the same.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu May 01 2003 - 12:13:05 EDT