From: Doug Ewell (email@example.com)
Date: Mon Dec 14 2009 - 23:04:26 CST
"verdy_p" <verdy underscore p at wanadoo dot fr> wrote:
> "John H. Jenkins"
>> The Latin ligatures that are already there are for round-trip
>> compatibility *only*.
> NOT *only*. There are ligatures that were encoded because they are
> considered as unbreakable letters in some languages or as unbreakable
> symbols. In which case they are treated as distinct.
> See æ (from an old ligature of "ae"), Æ (from an old ligature of
> "AE"), œ (from an old ligature of "oe"), Œ (from an old ligature of
> "OE"), & (from an old ligature of "et"), ß (from an old ligature of
> "ſs" or "ſz").
I kind of assumed John was referring to the ligatures which are
stylistic in nature only, such as ﬀ and ﬁ and ﬂ and ﬃ and ﬄ and ﬅ and ﬆ.
-- Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA | http://www.ewellic.org RFC 5645, 4645, UTN #14 | ietf-languages @ http://is.gd/2kf0s
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Dec 14 2009 - 23:06:46 CST