Re: U+00B0 vs. U+00BA

From: Anto'nio Martins-Tuva'lkin (
Date: Mon Apr 03 2006 - 18:16:50 CST

  • Next message: Richard Wordingham: "Re: [indic] Re: Hello from West Bangal India"

    On 2006.04.03, 18:50, Jukka K. Korpela <> wrote:

    > due to its presence in ISO 8859-1 and other standards, where it appears
    > due to its role in Spanish orthography.

    Spanish, are you sure?! Oh boy, I should have bought the newspaper today!
    Spain invaded us, once again! ;-)

    > It may be replaced by the letter "o" in superscript style, but this may
    > involve loss of formatting information.

    This only exists as a separate character, instead of being replaced by a
    regular "o", because in portuguese "no" is an actual word and one of the
    uses of this character is the abbreviation of "número". (This must have
    happend in the era of typewriter or telegraph standardtization: a lot of
    other possible additions were by ten replaced by common letters.)

    (There are other interesting stories about "º" and "ª" in Portuguese, but
    not today.)

    > If you wish to use U+00BA as an all-purpose superscript version of the
    > letter "o", nobody can really prevent you. But it'll be on your own
    > risk.

    But I use it every day in usual Portuguese text exactly for that! :-)

    >> Both are cannonically decomposable to respectively U+004B and U+00B0
    >> U+0043.
    > No, DEGREE CELSIUS has _compatibility_ decomposition.

    Oops, sorry! You are right, of course! :-\

    -- ____.
    António MARTINS-Tuválkin | ()|
    <> |####|
    Estrada de Benfica, 692-c/v d.ta Não me invejo de quem tem |
    PT-1500-111 LISBOA carros, parelhas e montes |
    +351 934 821 700, +351 217 150 939 só me invejo de quem bebe | a água em todas as fontes |

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Apr 03 2006 - 19:11:02 CST