At 19:53 +0300 2002-07-04, John Hudson wrote:
>Well, we need and have (in OpenType and AAT) a general purpose 
>mechanism for typesetting texts employing ligatures as deemed fit by 
>the professional typographer. The expectation of such a mechanism is 
>that layout is applied to 'normal' text to render that text 
>according to the norms of particular typographic traditions, 
>publishing house styles, etc.. It should not be necessary to edit 
>the text, inserting ZWJ all over the place, in order to achieve this 
>result.
It *is* necessary for some ligatures in some scripts. Let's say that 
there is in the entire corpus of Ogham three ligatures of RUIS RUIS. 
We don't want to encode that as a separate character, and we don't 
want it to be on by default since there could be numerous other 
examples of RUIS side-by-side with RUIS. But a disgustingly complete 
font could take the ZWJ into account for the ligature, which could be 
used by people wanting to typeset the non-standard but extant 
ligature. ZWJ forces unusual ligatures if the font supports them, and 
ZWNJ breaks them where not.
>There are, however, kinds of documents in which the presence or 
>absence of ligatures is best determined by the author of the 
>document, and for that reason the ZWJ provides a means for the 
>author to specify ligation in plain text.
As I have said.
>But it seems to me that such documents are the exception rather than the norm
This is certainly true. That's why ZWJ should not be preferred for 
non-exceptional kinds of ligation. But some scripts like Hungarian 
Runic and Germanic Runic have a fairly large set which are used from 
time to time and irregularly.
>(a particular set of ligatures involving the lowercase f have been a 
>normative aspect of European typography for more than 500 years; in 
>my profession they are not considered optional or discretionary in 
>the setting of running text at typical sizes).
Except for Turkish and Azerbaijani of course. :-)
>Documents using ZWJ can only be reliably rendered in particular fonts.
Well, the same holds true for all ligatures.
>For example, there is no reason why I should not include the 
>sequence 'p ZWJ q' in a document, but unless I have a font 
>containing a pq ligature I will not be able to render the sequence 
>as intended by the author.
But if you were changing the font, it would be available for those 
fonts which had it, and ignored for those fonts which didn't.
-- Michael Everson *** Everson Typography *** http://www.evertype.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Fri Jul 05 2002 - 16:15:33 EDT