Re: ZWJ, ZWNJ and Markup languages.

From: Plug Gulp <>
Date: Mon, 30 Nov 2015 02:58:18 +0000

On Sat, Nov 28, 2015 at 1:42 AM, Martin J. Dürst <> wrote:
> They are indeed suitable for use with markup languages. They are so suitable
> that they are already provided as entities in RFC 2070, which is now
> historic, and from there on through HTML 4.0 and onwards. Please see

Thank you Martin for the information! Yes, I now see that it is indeed
specified in the HTML spec here

Thanks once again for the help!

Kind regards,


> I'm not sure why Unicode 8.0 has the text it has; at the least, this should
> be toned down somewhat to say "they may be replaced by higher-level ligation
> and cursive control mechanisms if available".
> Thanks for finding this!
> The main reason for this is that these characters apply at a single point;
> creating markup such as <zwj/> and <zwnj/> would not give any advantages
> over &zwj;/&zwnj;.
> Markup is at its best when it can be applied to nested spans of text. It is
> not inconcievable that something like <do_not_ligate_inside>...
> </do_not_ligate_inside> could occasionally be useful, but I have
> difficulties immagining a use case of the top of my head.
> I'll file a bug report with the content of this email.
> Regards, Martin.
Received on Sun Nov 29 2015 - 20:59:33 CST

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Sun Nov 29 2015 - 20:59:33 CST