Re: Uppercase variant of U+00DF LATIN SMA LL LETTER SHARP S ("German s harp s", "▀" )

From: Asmus Freytag (
Date: Thu Feb 17 2005 - 18:37:08 CST

  • Next message: Patrick Andries: "Re: Uppercase variant of U+00DF LATIN SMA LL LETTER SHARP S ("German s harp s", "▀" )"

    At 03:23 PM 2/17/2005, Patrick Andries wrote:
    >Asmus Freytag a Úcrit :
    >>Your proposal by focusing entirely on the appearance, would negate that
    >My "proposal" was dealing only with being able to display PRE▀BURG with
    >the current technology

    You proposed that the coding should be SS and that an optional ligature be
    used to display an ▀ glyph that harmonizes with ALL CAPS. In effect that's
    equivalent to coding S ZWJ S.

    >(your example about applying a title style) I think it is feasible while
    >preserving an underlying orthographic representation.

    The underlying orthography, and that's where your misunderstanding comes
    in, is to preserve the ▀ *character* in order to distinguish this from the
    case where 'SS' is the uppercase of 'ss'.

    >I did not propose any solution to insure roundtrip between (lowercase)
    >▀ <-> SS, a very old problem. I'm not that amibitious ;-) I answered a
    >different problem. Sorry for the misunderstanding.

    But that's precisely the reason why people are using non-standard spellings
    for words like PRE▀BURG. So a 'solution' that ignores that requirement is
    no solution.

    The appearance of the ▀ is a secondary matter; it is correctly identified
    as a glyph representation problem by you and others. But it is a
    representation of ▀, not a representation of SS. Therefore, if we allow the
    encoding to represent this distinction it could be <▀, FVS1> but never <S
    ZWJ S>.

    To drive the argument a bit further: imagine you wanted to show the double
    capital S in an politically incorrect manner in the middle of a word.
    That's sometimes done for effect in political cartoons and similar forms of
    writing. Assume that you wanted to realize that using character encoding
    and font technology in a systematic way. That would be a situation where
    you would have a special SS ligature and the underlying encoding could be
    <S ZWJ S>. I don't recommend that you actually do that, but it's the type
    of situation, "alternate form for the character sequence SS" that would be
    well-supported by your proposed approach.


    >>You've convinced me that there would be a benefit for Unicode in this
    >>arena, so as to help people arrive at an unambiguous underlying representation.
    >Happy to have contributed ;-)

    PS: you're welcome ! ;-)


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Feb 17 2005 - 18:38:03 CST