From: Wolfgang Schmidle (wschmidle@mpiwg-berlin.mpg.de)
Date: Wed Jun 08 2011 - 10:54:12 CDT
Am 04.06.11 20:28, schrieb Andrew West:
> On 4 June 2011 19:00, Leo Broukhis<leob@mailcom.com> wrote:
>> There exists a ligature for the Latin postpositional conjunction -que
>> that looks like q with a smaller yogh glued to it, similar to but not
>> exactly "qȝ":
> See thread<http://unicode.org/mail-arch/unicode-ml/y2009-m12/0001.html>
>
> Andrew
By the way, we have decided to live a little less on the cutting edge.
We try to approximate our texts with Unicode means, but we allow only
things that can reasonably be expected to be displayed properly in a web
browser. For example, we use combining characters even though many fonts
still struggle with them, but we do not use codepoints in the Private
Use Area, even if they are standard MUFI codepoints. (An example for
"official Unicode" that we would not use are ideographic description
sequences in Chinese text.)
We use a <reg> tag for all additional information, e.g. for resolving
abbreviations (and also for ideographic description sequences). On the
other hand, we do not regularize e.g. "superfluous" renaissance accents
in our texts and instead rely on our display system to create the word
form that can be found in a dictionary.
For example, we would write <reg norm="teq́ue" faithful="té"
type="simple">teq́ꝫ</reg>, which would display as
teq́ꝫ in display mode "Original" (the user should have installed a font
that contains "ꝫ")
té in diplay mode "Original" with checked box "faithful" (the user
should have installed a MUFI font and use it for displaying the text)
teq́ue in display mode "Regularized" (this is the default mode)
teque in display mode "Normalized" (which is created on the fly by the
display system)
And I think the character in question should receive an official
codepoint. Better still, qꝫ and q́ꝫ should have separate codepoints. I am
aware that this is against the official policy of no longer accepting
ligatures. My argument would be that qꝫ and q́ꝫ are part of a limited
list of characters contained in early letter cases. Yes, I choose to
ignore problems of upright versus italics, "qꝫ" versus "q;", or what
this would mean for the long and massively font-specific list of
ligatures and abbreviations in early Greek letter cases. Still, it would
be nice.
Wolfgang
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jun 08 2011 - 10:58:26 CDT