Re: U+0345 COMBINING GREEK YPOGEGRAMMENI not usable in other scripts as "hook below"?

From: Alexej Kryukov (
Date: Mon Jun 19 2006 - 16:02:27 CDT

  • Next message: John Hudson: "Re: U+0345 COMBINING GREEK YPOGEGRAMMENI not usable in other scripts as "hook below"?"

    On Saturday 17 June 2006 23:28, John Hudson wrote:
    > The use of adscript iota with uppercase letters certainly precedes
    > the 19th and 20th century. I have seen examples from the 16th
    > century. Yes, these were in editions published outside of Greece, but
    > as Konstantine Staikos has documented, emigre Greeks were heavily
    > involved in that publishing.

    Well, I agree that the tradition to put adscript iota after
    capital letters may have existed long before the 19th century. I just
    insist that the opposite practice is also perfectly legal (at least
    in some types of editions) and may well correspond to the requirements
    of fine Greek typography.

    > The <ccmp> feature can be used to decompose individual glyphs into
    > multiple glyphs. Decomposing digraphs is one of the uses for it.

    Unfortunately, <ccmp> is not exactly that I want, because this tag
    is normally used to describe very basical shaping behavior rather
    that just typographic peculiarities. So disabling it would probably
    be a bad idea (even if the application allows to do that). Thus I
    can't use <ccmp> for those situations where I want to allow users
    to access default glyph images mapped to specific slots by turning
    any such "decompositions" defined for those slots off.

    I also think that the desired type of glyph replacement cannot be
    called "decomposition" in the strict sense. Suppose I would like
    <U+1F08, U+03B9> to be substituted instead of <U+1F88>: this
    substitution would be absolutely correct from the typographic point of
    view, but surely will have nothing to do with the canonical
    decomposition for <U+1F88>, which is <U+1F08, U+0345>. So I am not sure
    if using <ccmp> for this purpose would be really correct.

    > However, note that not all digraphs should necessarily be spaced out
    > when overall spacing is increased: the Dutch IJ digraph is often seen
    > spaced like e.g. R IJ N -- even in inscriptions carved in stone,
    > where font or application limitations certainly were not to blame.

    Well, even if some Latin digraphs don't require to be spaced out, all
    Greek combinations with iota adscript surely do.

    Alexej Kryukov <akrioukov at newmail dot ru>
    Moscow State University
    Historical Faculty

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jun 19 2006 - 16:17:01 CDT