Re: U+0023

From: Patrick Andries (patrick.andries@xcential.com)
Date: Fri Apr 01 2005 - 09:37:35 CST

  • Next message: Patrick Andries: "Use of U+203D (interrobang)"
    Jukka K. Korpela a écrit : 
    On Fri, 1 Apr 2005, Andrew C. West wrote:

  
    I also had always assumed that the second part of the Numero sign was a
superscript "o",
    
    
The NUMERO SIGN is defined as having the compatibility decomposition
<compat> 004E 006F
so it is effectively a separately coded variant of the
two-character string "No". Superscripting is not implied, and in fact
many glyphs for the numero sign do not have the "o" as superscript,
though a little bit above the baseline (and underlined and in small
size).
    This depends on the country's typographical tradition. In French the «o» should always be above the baseline. I'm yet to see a font with a N<sup>os</sup> (and its lowercase n<sup>os</sup>) with a bar under the "os" as was frequent in French lead typography for writing the plural of N° (yes, for simplicity sake I used the degree sign which is on my keyboard, but no superscrit s on my keyboard).

    Some subscribers wondered of the rule is still valid, it is very much so : http://www.dsi.univ-paris5.fr/typo.html (but the bar below tends to disappear because it is not easy to get).

    http://www.tutoweb.com/blog/index.php (lower down, with 7 comments)

    http://www.irisa.fr/faqtypo/lessons.pdf (page 10)

    Etc.

    P. A.
    (I'm travelling so I can't quote the Ramat or the Imprimerie nationale's guide)


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Apr 01 2005 - 09:39:07 CST