From: SADAHIRO Tomoyuki (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Mon Jan 22 2007 - 07:12:24 CST
I think that is almost same as KATAKANA-HIRAGANA DOUBLE HYPHEN
where both bars are horizontal.
On Mon, 22 Jan 2007 12:39:17 +0100, Karl Pentzlin wrote
> I consider to propose a DOUBLE HYPHEN punctuation mark. Before I
> really do this, I would like to get any opinions and comments.
> The "double hyphen" I discuss here consists of two stacked dashes,
> like U+003D EQUALS SIGN, but in most fonts the dashes are shorter,
> like U+2010 HYPHEN.
> It should have the same character properties as U+2010 HYPHEN.
> It is different from the EQUALS SIGN (by appearance and properties),
> from U+FE66 SMALL EQUALS SIGN (by intended use and properties),
> and from the accepted *U+A78A MODIFIED LETTER SHORT EQUALS SIGN
> (by properties, maybe by appearance, and by intended use especially
> as *U+A78A is a letter).
> I know that the term "double hyphen" is also used for two consecutive
> dashes (which are already representable in Unicode e.g. as U+002D U+002D).
> Therefore there may be a better name as DOUBLE HYPHEN for the "double
> hyphen" discussed here.
> In most cases, such a "double hyphen" may be regarded as a glyph variant
> of the "single hyphen" U+002D or U+2010 (especially when using Fraktur
> But there are cases where this is not the case, but where an explicitly
> double hyphen is to be distinguished from the standard (single) hyphen
> in plain text.
> One special case is covered by the already encoded U+2E17 DOUBLE OBLIQUE
> HYPHEN, but the "double hyphen" discussed here is not necessary oblique
> (glyph variants may be straight or oblique in fact).
> In modern German literature, a "double hyphen" is heavily used by the
> author Arno Schmidt (1914-1979, see e.g. the German page
> http://de.wikipedia.org/wiki/Arno_Schmidt ). He uses this for some kinds
> of compound words, contrasting to other uses of the hyphen where he
> uses the standard (single) hyphen.
> You find an example at www.europatastatur.de/material/ArnoSchmidt1.jpg .
> It is a scan from Arno Schmidt, Abend mit Goldrand, p.143 of the 1993
> edition. You see the double hyphen within the red circles, together
> with some single hyphens and (differently looking) equation signs on
> the same page, showing that the character is not a font variant of the
> latter two.
> At www.europatastatur.de/material/ArnoSchmidt2.jpg (a scan of
> Dieter E. Zimmer, Sprache im Zeichen ihrer Unverbesserlichkeit,
> Hamburg 2005, p.169), you see a citation of a text from Arno Schmidt.
> You see the double hyphen misprinted as an equals sign, due to the lack
> of a "double hyphen" proper. But you see the double hyphen is cited beside
> single hyphens within the same text part. This proves that the double
> hyphen is really needed not only within the text of the author, but
> also when writing about his work e.g. in Germanistic texts.
> In a recent proposal to add Medievalist puncuation characters to Unicode
> (L2/07-004), there is stated:
> "Although many editors substitute modern for medieval punctuation,
> a growing number of medievalists insist that modern punctuation cannot
> adequately represent the syntactical features of medieval texts."
> If you admit that this applies not only to medieval texts but also to
> more recent texts and the scientists dealing with them, then it is an
> argument to include things like the "double hyphen" into Unicode.
> A different example for citing double hyphens is found at the German
> site http://home.hccnet.nl/j.hastrich/bd-z2-toten-1835-1873.htm ,
> where the author also uses equal signs due to the lack of a "double
> hyphen" proper.
> A completely different use of a double hyphen like character was found
> in an earlier version of the proposal L2/066 on 2006-08-23 (it was not
> subject of that proposal; that document was updated some days later
> without that example).
> That version of the document contained on page 7 in figure 7
> "Sample from Jones 1941 ..." a symbol which resembles U+2E17 DOUBLE
> OBLIQUE HYPHEN (see www.europatastatur.de/material/Jones-1941.png ).
> As the single hyphens in that sample are also oblique, it is likely
> that the symbol is some kind of double dash distinct from the hyphen
> while its obliqueness is font specific, thus it seems not to be an
> U+2E17 proper. Also, it seems not to be an U+003D EQUALS SIGN, as it
> is repeated on the beginning of the last line of the first column.
> (Unfortunately, I did not save the whole document at that time, and
> my question on the Unicore list from 2006-08-23 about the nature of
> that character got no answer. Thus, at the moment I have no more
> information available regarding that source).
> If a "double hyphen" is included into Unicode, it should have an
> annotation in the lists like U+2E17, stating the intent that it should
> not be used where a glyph variant of U+002D or U+2010 is appropriate.
> - Karl Pentzlin
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jan 22 2007 - 07:14:27 CST