Re: New translation posted

From: Jukka K. Korpela (
Date: Sat Feb 03 2007 - 16:51:47 CST

  • Next message: Doug Ewell: "Re: UTS#40 (BOCU-1) ambiguity and possible serious bug about leading BOM"

    On Sat, 3 Feb 2007, Hans Aberg wrote:

    > 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.

    So how do you call the renderings "poor" then? Actually the Unicode
    standard _has_ renderings - reference glyphs. They are not normative of
    course, but neither are they irrelevant. Besides, U+0027 has (in the Code
    Chart) the special comment "neutral (vertical) glyph with mixed usage".
    What I wrote was an attempt at explaining this from the usage perspective.

    > 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.

    You're not the first one to suggest such things, but they have been
    considered and rejected. It is very unlikely that the case could be
    re-opened. If you need to distinguish right single quote from apostrophe,
    you need to do that at formatting level and/or markup.

    Jukka "Yucca" Korpela,

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Feb 03 2007 - 17:09:26 CST