Re: Großes Eszett

From: Leo Broukhis (
Date: Wed Jan 21 2009 - 16:21:32 CST

  • Next message: Mark E. Shoulson: "Re: Großes Eszett"

    On Wed, Jan 21, 2009 at 1:56 PM, John Hudson <> wrote:
    > Leo Broukhis wrote:
    >> Oops. Take that back, my hissing should be directed at Microsoft. It's
    >> not Code2000, it's Times New Roman.
    > I've checked the cmap table of Vista Times New Roman, and there is no
    > mapping for U+1E9E. However, the font does not appear to contain a .notdef
    > glyph, which is the normal display when a font does not support a character
    > in the text string. It has an empty box glyph in the GID 0 position of the
    > font, which is where the .notdef glyph belongs, but this glyph is encoded as
    > U+0000 and is called /uni0000/ in the post table, so will not be reliably
    > treated as .notdef. I'm not sure why the application or browser is choosing
    > to display the unsupported character as S with cedilla. It seems a pretty
    > random choice.

    Not so random for eszett, don't you think? But U+1E9D (latin small
    letter delta) is displayed as a lowercase s with cedilla, ruining the


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jan 21 2009 - 16:23:36 CST