Re: Coptic abbreviations

From: Patrick Andries (
Date: Tue Jul 05 2005 - 11:36:49 CDT

  • Next message: Mete Kural: "RE: Arabic encoding model" a écrit :
    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Michael Everson" <>
    Thank you, Michael Everson, for your work in the Coptic proposal.
    Because the use of the contraction bar is productive, it was judged 
    inappropriate to encode the COIS ligature with a precomposed bar. 
    U+0503 is the abbreviation bar.
    I'm not too sure I understand. Let's serialize my questions:
    1) You mean a bar must always be added to U+2CEA to write COIS...?
    2) If so, what does U+2CEA without a bar mean? To me, without an abbreviation bar, this symbol simply also means "Lord" but in a rarer font style since the "cs" are only ligated in this word/symbol as a far as I know.
    I have also seen the CS non ligated with a bar meaning « Lord », although this is rare most probably because it is not very pleasing to the eye. I believe the ligated CS (with a bar or not, although I, like you, believe the absence of the bar is relatively rare) is just a more aesthetically pleasing form of the same abbreviation (whether flattened and ligated or not). Personally, this COIS is just an abbreviation using the abbreviating top bar as so many others abbreviations in Greek and Coptic. A reasonably modern engine should be able to form any of the styling variants of this « Lord » abbreviation when faced with C+S+contracting bar (by C+S I mean the two Coptic characters and not the ligated U+2CEA), the result is just a ligature.

    At this stage, the encoding of U+2CEA can no longer be undone, but maybe the reference glyph is erroneous (it is my impression, but I let you see what you think, Ashraf).

    P. A.

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Jul 05 2005 - 11:38:05 CDT