Re: New translation posted

From: Hans Aberg (
Date: Sat Feb 03 2007 - 13:34:43 CST

  • Next message: Hans Aberg: "Re: New translation posted"

    On 3 Feb 2007, at 16:29, Jukka K. Korpela 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 Unicode set does not come with renderings, I think.

    > 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 slanted.

    Well, the apostrophe used in language is not semantically a right
    single quotation mark. There might be some subtle rendering
    differences between a U+2019 and a proper, linguistic apostrophe,
    like in spacing.

    And if U+0027 is a multipurpose character, then a there is a gap in
    the Unicode character set.

    And then: a new character should added.

       Hans Aberg

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Feb 03 2007 - 13:37:26 CST