On 4 August 2010 09:19, William_J_G Overington <[email protected]> wrote:
Answering the two questions below on the assumption that s-VS1 <0073 FE00> were to be defined as a variation sequence for long s in all type styles, and without giving any opinion on the merits or otherwise of Karl's proposal in general, or specifically the merits of double-encoding long s as a variation sequence. > How could one express the following please using variation selectors and the > Zero Width Joiner ZWJ in relation to the two character sequence sh? > > If you have a long s available, please use it, otherwise please use an > ordinary s: furthermore, if you have a long s h ligature available please use > that instead. s-VS1-ZWJ-h Note that there must be no character between a variation selector and the base character it applies to, so the ZWJ must go after VS1. > How could one express the following please using variation selectors and the > Zero Width Joiner ZWJ in relation to the three character sequence ssi? > > If you have a long s available, please use it, otherwise please use an > ordinary s: furthermore, if you have a long s long s i ligature available > please use that instead. The use of long s versus short s and ligaturing of these letters varies widely geographically and historically and depending upon typeface. The following examples would all be valid *if* s-VS1 were to be defined as a variation sequence for long s (in all type styles): s-VS1-ZWJ-s-VS1-ZWJ-i -- for a ligatured ſſi as in "miſſion" (usual in 18th century English typography) s-VS1-s-i -- for a non-ligatured ſsi as in "illuſtriſsimos" (usual in 18th century Spanish typography) s-VS1-ZWJ-s-i -- for a ligatured ſs plus i as in "bleſsings" (usual for italics only in 16th and early 17th century English and French typography) s-s-VS1-ZWJ-i -- for s plus a ligatured ſi as in "utilisſima" (sometimes in 16th century Italian typography) Andrew
