Re: Uppercase is coming? (U+1E9E)

From: Michael Everson (
Date: Fri May 04 2007 - 16:11:13 CST

  • Next message: Asmus Freytag: "Re: Uppercase is coming? (U+1E9E)"

    At 14:41 -0700 2007-05-04, John Hudson wrote:
    >Michael Everson wrote:
    >>>But I still don't think it is anything other than a glyph variant of SS.
    >>It is a glyph variant of SS only in the same
    >>way that is a glyph variant of ss.
    >I don't think that follows at all, Michael,
    >because in the German orthography -- what I'm
    >now tempted to call a pseudo-bicameral alphabet
    >-- and ss are clearly distinct in the
    >lowercase state, but they are not distinct in
    >the uppercase state.

    It follows because I am talking about character
    identity, not orthographic rules. Standard German
    orthography does what you say. Non-standard (but
    smart) German orthography provides roundtrip
    casing, ss <-> SS and <-> [].

    >I happen to think they should be distinct in the
    >uppercase state -- as, clearly, the inventors of
    >the uppercase eszett thought also -- but they're

    In standard German orthography, they are not.

    >So the options are to encode the uppercase
    >eszett as a quasi-uppercase letter explicitly
    >excluded from the standard German orthography,
    >or to devise a means to enable this as a display
    >variant of the standard German orthography.

    There is no shame in encoding things that are not
    found in standard orthographies. We have lots of
    these sorts of thing.

    >>I prefer character encoding for this; I understand you think otherwise.
    >It is more the case that I have not seen a good
    >argument as to why character encoding is better,
    >and I can see numerous implementation problems
    >with such an encoding that can be bypassed by
    >dealing with it as a display issue. I'm not dead
    >set against the encoding, I just don't see what
    >the overriding benefit is.

    I think lots of Latin-script clever-font display
    trickery is unnecessary and less preferable to
    character encoding.

    But then I think that most of the lower-case
    Latin letters in the standard which are missing
    upper-case pairs should be given their upper case

    Michael Everson *

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri May 04 2007 - 16:15:48 CST