On 9 Dec 2015, at 23:32, Martin J. Dürst wrote:
> On 2015/12/10 09:30, Mark E. Shoulson wrote:
>
>> I remember when we went through all this the first time around,
>> encoding
>> ẞ in the first place. People were saying "But the Duden says
>> no!!!" And
>> someone then pointed out, "Please close your Duden and cast your gaze
>> upon ITS FRONT COVER, where you will find written in inch-high
>> capitals
>> plain as day, "DER GROẞE DUDEN"
>> (http://www.typografie.info/temp/GrosseDuden.jpg) So in terms of
>> prescription vs description, the Duden pretty much torpedoes itself.
>
> This is an interesting example of a phenomenon that turns up in many
> other contexts, too. A similar example is the use of accents on
> upper-case letters in French in France where 'officially', upper-case
> letters are written without accents.
while in Québec, upper-case letters are written _with_ accents. l10n…
Marc.
> When working on internationalization, it's always good to keep eyes
> open and not just only follow the rules.
>
> However, the example is also somewhat misleading. The book in the
> picture is clearly quite old. The Duden that was cited is new. I
> checked with "Der Grosse Duden" on Amazon, but all the books I found
> had the officially correct spelling. On the other hand, I remember
> that when the upper-case sharp s came up for discussion in Unicode,
> source material showed that it was somewhat popular quite some time
> ago (possibly close in age with the old Duden picture). So we would
> have to go back and check the book in the picture to see what it says
> about ß to be able to claim that Duden was (at some point in time)
> inconsistent with itself.
>
> Regards, Martin.
Received on Wed Dec 09 2015 - 23:37:04 CST
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Wed Dec 09 2015 - 23:37:05 CST
