From: Michael Everson (email@example.com)
Date: Fri May 04 2007 - 16:13:48 CST
At 14:57 -0700 2007-05-04, John Hudson wrote:
>>I bet the Duden thought "Capital ß" not "Capital special SS ligature".
>I'm sure they did, but then I think of a
>small*cap* A glyph even when I know it is
>representing a lowercase a character in the text
Small-caps styling is systematic; this isn't analogous to ß.
>But according to the same Duden, uppercase ß =
>SS, so a capital ß is just another way of
>writing SS. I wish it were not so, that there
>were an actual uppercase ß, but there isn't, and
>this proposal does not introduce one: it just
>creates a glyph encoding for this form, thereby
>inviting confusion and -- like the Arabic
>presentation forms -- needlessly multiplying the
>ways in which the same text can be encoded.
This isn't really "endless". It's just inelegant.
But that's because German orthographic rules are
odd with regard to ß.
-- Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri May 04 2007 - 16:15:46 CST