Re: AW: Ligatures fi and ffi

From: Dominikus Scherkl (
Date: Wed Jun 01 2005 - 15:20:08 CDT

  • Next message: Asmus Freytag: "Re: AW: Ligatures fi and ffi"

    >> The use of optional ligatures cannot be reasonably
    >> decided on algorithmic grounds alone. Whether you use a ligature for
    >> "fi"
    >> or for "st" is a stylistic choice.
    > One should note that every ligature can be given a semantic use,
    > namely by quoting it directly, like in the sentence 'An example of a
    > ligature is "Þ" [ligature fi]'. Perhaps textbooks in Arabic want to
    > name those ligatures and different letter representations explicitly.
    > Many glyphs can thus made into semantic objects, by simply
    > objectifying them.

    These are both causes for the existence of "grapheme joiner" and
    "grapheme non-joiner", but not for the existence of precomposed
    ligatures. If you realy require a ligature or require two characters
    not to be ligated, use them. But in a smart rendering system this
    would be very seldom nessessary.

    And, ok, thousands of required ligatures was a litte extreme, but not
    so far from reality if you take those of all supported languages into
    I don't expect a single font to support them all, but all I wanted to say
    was: it is possible to support them, the technique already exists, and it
    does not require precomposed ligatures as encoded characters. So
    it should not be too hard to build a rendering system and fonts that
    support the few ligatures used in languages using the latin script.

    Best Regards

    Dominikus Scherkl

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jun 01 2005 - 15:20:46 CDT