From: Jukka K. Korpela (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Sat Feb 03 2007 - 09:29:51 CST
On Sat, 3 Feb 2007, Hans Aberg wrote:
> Aren't you lead stray by the poor renderings usually given to U+0027?
No, the common renderings of U+0027 are correct. The glyphs are suitable
for the two reasonable uses of U+0027:
1) In computer languages where it belongs to the language itself, by
definition, typically as a quotation mark.
2) In legacy data and in new data written for a limited-repertoire
environment where U+0027 is used as a replacement for left or right single
quotation mark, prime, modifier letter left half ring, modifier letter
right half ring, or some other loosely "apostrophe-like" character that
was or is not available.
> As it is semantically an apostrophe,
No, U+0027 is a semantically vague, multi-purpose character with a
(partly) misleading Unicode name.
> it should be used when an apostrophe is called for; not U+2019
No, the Unicode standard clearly says that U+2019 is preferred as
punctuation apostrophe. The character U+0027 should have a neutral
(vertical) glyph, and usually has, though in some fonts it's slighly
-- Jukka "Yucca" Korpela, http://www.cs.tut.fi/~jkorpela/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Feb 03 2007 - 09:32:19 CST