Re: U+2018 is not RIGHT HIGH 6

From: Mark Davis ☕ <>
Date: Mon, 30 Apr 2012 08:25:04 -0700

FYI, we have gathered in CLDR on usage of characters in different
languages, including quotation marks (and those to use for embeddings). It
 is at
. (The page takes a while to load because of the exemplar information at
the bottom.)

If any of that data appears to be incorrect or missing, people can request
a change -- we are in midst of our data submission cycle right now:

Mark <>
*— Il meglio è l’inimico del bene —*

On Sun, Apr 29, 2012 at 23:43, Asmus Freytag <> wrote:

> Even if some minutiae of glyph selection are left to a font, the problem
> is often that there's no specification as to what certain languages need,
> so that fonts cannot be expected to provide the correct implementation.
> When Unicode was first created, the fact that one and the same quotation
> mark character could be both opening and closing was not widely realized in
> the character encoding community. This was rectified over time, and now
> there is detailed information (even though it may not be exhaustive) on
> common practices in chapter 6 of the standard.
> So far, this information is limited to character usage (which character
> code when). Augmenting that with information on required design
> differences, that is elements of glyph variations that are encompassed by
> certain of the characters, and how they track with language, would round
> out the picture.
> I take this kind of information as an essential adjunct to the identity of
> a character, as in effect, it documents which typical glyph variants have
> been explicitly unified. For many characters, in particular the letters,
> glyph variations rarely need to be documented, because each variant relates
> to the underlying character in an "obvious" manner. The same is usually not
> the case for punctuation.
> So, one of the most useful things that could come of the current
> discussion, would be a thorough documentation of the glyph variations
> needed to support both English and German for the same quotation mark
> characters.
> The document that was passed around here, is difficult to follow because
> it mixes issues of glyph design with character selection and font
> selection. The discussion would have to be recast in terms of what design
> features successful language-dependent glyphs would need to exhibit for a
> combination of existing characters with certain languages.
> A./
Received on Mon Apr 30 2012 - 10:27:25 CDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Apr 30 2012 - 10:27:26 CDT