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

From: Philippe Verdy (
Date: Mon Jun 30 2003 - 17:40:54 EDT

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

    On Monday, June 30, 2003 9:13 PM, James H. Cloos Jr. <> wrote:

    > 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.

    Doesn't it create a new equivalence for the sequences
        <ij, diaeresis> and <ij>
    if neither of them are followed by another combining above diacritic ?
    If we dont want such equivalences, the Unicode standard should
    say then that it's illegal to use two consecutive identical combining
    diacritics. Or simply forbid using <ij,diaeresis> alone (not followed
    by another diacritic with CC=230).

    Yes this is really tricky, and academic, I admit. But what forbids
    encoding two superposed arrows above any letter? Or encoding
    a <ij,macron> (with the dots removed from ij) followed by
    diaeresis, which could have a mathematical meaning?

    -- Philippe.

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jun 30 2003 - 18:28:45 EDT