Re: s-j combination in Unicode?

On 2/16/2013 1:38 AM, Stephan Stiller wrote:
>
>> That would make it analogous in a way to German ß.
>>
>> The minute things show up in real orthographies the pressure to
>> handle ALL CAPS exists.
>
> The question then is whether you'll find "SJ" or overlaid "S"/"J". Or
> how a Swede would instinctively handle this, in the absence of an
> example of a consistently applied rule.

There's a question firts, of whether there's a difference between s+j
and simple "sj". Is it just to mark a different pronunciation of what
would be "sj" in standard Swedish, or are these contrasting in
Elfdlalien as well.

I suspect that the fallback would be "SJ", if nothing else is available,
but currently, anybody using s+j would use private fonts and thus
there's not necessarily a need to use a fallback.

This is different from German use where telegraphs and typewriters were
instrumental in creating and cementing the need for a fallback.

The German-style fallback is painful enough as it is to make sure it's
not Unicode creating the bottleneck.

>
> (By the way, for those finding the German rule to write "SS"
> unsatisfactory: It's hard to come by an actual minimal pair.

MASSE - mass or measurements? See, not hard at all.

With the new orthography, "ss" vs. "ß" affects the pronunciation of the
preceding vowel. It's irritating to see "SS" because you have to
override that rule when you know that the word in lowercase was
pronounced differently.

And, as Andreas had painstakenly done, you can collect a nearly infinite
array of examples where users, in rule-bound Germany(!), simply continue
to ignore that rule.

A./

PS:
> And it's not like capitalization is otherwise invertible – the
> capitalization bits contain information as well, after all.)
>
Besides the point a bit. Even thought it's true that mixed case carries
information that's lost in all upper or all lowercase, the issue is a
bit different, as not focused on one letter..
Received on Sat Feb 16 2013 - 12:01:51 CST