Re: Apostrophes at

From: Asmus Freytag (
Date: Thu Aug 23 2007 - 12:45:27 CDT

  • Next message: John Hudson: "Re: Question about the replacement of Greek extended characters (u1F..) by equivalent Greek ones (u03..)"

    On 8/23/2007 1:36 AM, Andreas Prilop wrote:
    > On Wed, 22 Aug 2007, Asmus Freytag wrote:
    >> The genesis is likely the use of HTML editing software,
    >> such as FrontPage, that does not support U+2019.
    > Then change the tool!
    > If uses tools that do not support Unicode,
    > what do you expect from other people?
    I don't see you volunteering as an editor for this task. The
    consortium's editorial activities are done on a volunteer basis, some
    with more or less tacit approval from their employers, some without any
    pay whatsoever. In that light, please ask yourself whether this issue
    really is so important, especially when compared to the effort required.

    Material on the Unicode site needs to foremost be factually correct, up
    to date, and complete. That's the highest priority and takes most of the
    time - as the site gets larger it gets more challenging for the editors.
    Next in line comes editing for clarity, style, grammar, and spelling (as
    well as controlling terminology). These are all tasks that, if not done,
    impede the use of the material by its intended audience.

    The kind of task you have in mind ranks at the low end of that scale.
    The use of 2019 for typeset publications is indeed the recommended
    practice, but for non-typeset publications, the use of ' continues to be
    acceptable, and it certainly is general practice.

    Now, for typeset material, the Unicode book, and including the UAXs,
    which were recently added to the printed book, the consortium has taken
    the pains to eliminate or convert ' and " as you can see if you look at
    Unicode 5.0. The same material was also proof-read by an independent
    professional. That's very appropriate for something published as a book,
    but not something that the consortium can afford to do across its
    ever-changing website.

    In summary, I think the allocation of resources by the Consortium
    strikes me as largely correct, and given that they are finite, if this
    is the one thing that falls off the plate, that seems just fine.


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Aug 23 2007 - 12:47:27 CDT