Re: Accented ij ligatures (was: Unicode Public Review Issues update)

From: James H. Cloos Jr. (
Date: Mon Jun 30 2003 - 15:13:36 EDT

  • Next message: Philippe Verdy: "Re: Accented ij ligatures (was: Unicode Public Review Issues update)"

    >>>>> "Philippe" == Philippe Verdy <> writes:

    Philippe> But if one wants to restore the preious visual behavior,
    Philippe> even if it's incorrect for languages using this digraph as a
    Philippe> letter, what would be the behavior of using the following
    Philippe> sequence: <ij, combining dot above, combining accute>
    Philippe> (i.e. should this display 1 or 2 dots?)

    Seems clear to me that if ij has soft dots (and I agree it should)
    then to get a pair of dots via a combining accent one should use a
    two dot combining accent: U+0308 COMBINING DIAERESIS.

    So if you want two dots and an acute use ‹ij, U+0308, U+0301›: ij̈́

    Of course a given font’s diaeresis will often not line up with the
    stems of its ij, and a custom one should be used instead. Or
    features and/or ligs as appropriate to the font’ technology could
    just use the ‹ij› glyph w/ an extra acute. Either way it is a glyph
    issue rather than a character issue.

    But it really seems to be just an academic issue, yes?


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jun 30 2003 - 16:10:57 EDT