From: Pim Blokland (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Mon May 26 2003 - 16:00:39 EDT
Karl Pentzlin schreef:
> In quality typography, does the "ij" in "bijectie" look different
> from an ij ligature?
> Is it recommended to write "bi[ZWNJ]jectie" when you don't use
> U+0133 for "common" "ij"s?
No, it's just one word; we don't put non-joiners inside a word.
It also should not look any different from words where the ĳ is one
My feelings at this moment are that if you do want to make the
difference clear, write U+0133 for the "normal" ĳ sound and i+j for
when it's supposed to be two letters, and don't use any tricks such
as non-joiners. (If you MUST resort to tricks like that, my gut
feeling would be to use a joiner such as U+034F inside "normal" ijs
and nothing between the ij in bijectie. Again, no non-joiners inside
P.S. I haven't yet stumbled upon any words starting with ij which
were NOT pronounced with the ĳ sound. I'm beginning to think words
like that don't exist.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon May 26 2003 - 16:57:52 EDT