Re: Uppercase variant of U+00DF LATIN SMALL LETTER SHARP S ( "German sharp s", "" )

From: Antoine Leca (Antoine10646@leca-marti.org)
Date: Thu Feb 17 2005 - 07:09:24 CST

  • Next message: Otto Stolz: "Re: Uppercase variant of U+00DF LATIN SMALL LETTER SHARP S ("German sharp s", "ß")"

    On Thursday, February 16th, 2005 23:35Z Mark E. Shoulson wrote:

    > Which therefore raises the more general question: what with all
    > these "immutable" (stable) characteristics, what's Unicode to do in
    > a case where the usage really did completely change?

    I seem to rememebr a similar case: Georgian. It looks like to me in the
    beginning, Georgian was considered bicameral. Now it looks like it is not
    ( I could easily be wrong on this).

    Having say that, however I see a fundamental difference: the Georgian
    problem was dealt with before Unicode 2.0 (or shortly after); so the
    existing corpus was deemed insignificant.
    Here, we have a corpus that went very far back, since U+00DF is part of the
    Latin 1 block, so it went back at least to ISO/IEC 8859-1:1987 (and its
    avatars such as DEC Multinational or Windows...)

    Antoine



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Feb 17 2005 - 07:10:35 CST