Re: Ligatures fi and ffi

From: Jon Hanna (
Date: Thu Jun 02 2005 - 17:09:24 CDT

  • Next message: Hans Aberg: "Re: Ligatures fi and ffi"

    Hans Aberg wrote:
    > At 19:43 +0100 2005/06/02, Jon Hanna wrote:
    >> Hans Aberg wrote:
    >>> It seems me that, when considering a new glyph, one should strive to
    >>> figure if there is any semantic value to it; if not, it should
    >>> probably not be added.
    >> Hans, what the hell are you talking about?
    > Sorry, I do not see what you are hinting at here.

    That your suggestion has zero relevance to this list.

    >> Seriously, have even read the Standard this list discusses?
    > No.

    You really should. It's one thing to ask questions about Unicode without
    such background knowledge, another to suggest changes to it.

    > For example, I twice pointed out to BS
    > that he was wrong about the C++ standard, in a friendly and courteous
    > manner, of course.

    I can't claim such an accomplishment, though I did suggest an
    alternative to a technique he wrote about. However, I *have* read that

    > Since you view yourself better in this respect than
    > principle designers of major computer languages, I suggest you show off
    > your abilities a little more.

    No, I merely think I have the basics down (I haven't read a few of the
    annexes, but I don't opine about those).

    Jon Hanna
    "All good quotes are eventually attributed to Benjamin Franklin" - 
    Benjamin Franklin

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jun 02 2005 - 17:11:13 CDT