Re: Medievalist ligature character in the PUA

From: Mark Davis ☕ (
Date: Mon Dec 07 2009 - 10:32:51 CST

  • Next message: William_J_G Overington: "Re: Medievalist ligature character in the PUA"

    Because the OS can't depend on the fonts being set up correctly, probably
    the best solution is.

       - *Show Hidden Mode off:* suppress the drawing of individual glyphs for
       default ignorables (after, of course, the processing wherein those
       characters may produce effects on the rest of the text).
       - *Show Hidden Mode on:* replace the glyphs for those characters by those
       drawn from a special font, or by other drawn effects.

    That way the proper visual results of the SHM are not dependent on font


    On Mon, Dec 7, 2009 at 07:16, Andrew West <> wrote:

    > 2009/12/7 Doug Ewell <>:
    > >
    > > From TUS 5.0, Section 16.2 ("Layout Controls"), page 540:
    > > "As with all other alternate format characters, fonts should use an
    > > invisible zero-width glyph for representation of both ZWJ and ZWNJ."
    > In this respect I think that the Unicode Standard is wrong, or at
    > least out of date. It may have been a good idea to use an invisible
    > zero-width space glyph ten years ago when there was little expectation
    > that ZWJ or ZWNJ would work on most systems, but that is not the case
    > today. I note that many fonts on my system, including quite a few
    > fonts from Adobe and Microsoft, include a visible glyph for ZWJ, ZWNJ
    > and other format characters, but at least on Windows operating systems
    > the user will never see them under normal circumstances. But it is
    > useful to have the visible glyphs in the font for things like
    > character maps and for editors with a "View Hidden Characters" mode.
    > Andrew

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Dec 07 2009 - 10:35:33 CST