Re: Errors in TUS Figure 15.2?

From: Doug Ewell (
Date: Tue Aug 03 2004 - 00:53:28 CDT

  • Next message: Jony Rosenne: "RE:Holam (was Errors in TUS Figure 15.2?)"

    Peter Kirk <peterkirk at qaya dot org> wrote:

    > The situation is even more confused in that some Unicode characters,
    > e.g. U+0152 LATIN CAPITAL LIGATURE OE, are called LIGATUREs in their
    > character names but are unambiguously single Unicode characters (e.g.
    > they have no decomposition even for compatibility). (These are in
    > addition to the characters named LIGATURE in the Alphabetic
    > Presentation Forms block, which mostly have compatibility
    > decompositions.)

    The last thing you want to worry about is the correlation between
    whether a character has the word LIGATURE in its name and whether it is
    actually a ligature. That way lies madness.

    -Doug Ewell
     Fullerton, California

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Aug 03 2004 - 00:55:35 CDT