|With  MathML, you could||use:||
||
||anathemati||||<math><mmultiscripts><none/><mi mathvariant="roman">s</mi><mi mathvariant="roman">z</mi></math>| (drop that in an HTML document and take a look).

This doesn't look like plain text to me. I don't think it argues in favor of any sort of combining Z or general combinator mark. This is just what markup is for.

~mark

On 10/01/2013 08:05 PM, Leo Broukhis wrote:
If my understanding of interlinear annotations is correct, to achieve similarity with the attached sample some markup will be required as well:

anathemati<sup><U+FFF9>z<U+FFFA>s<U+FFFB></sup>e.

Leo


On Tue, Oct 1, 2013 at 3:51 PM, Jean-François Colson <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:

    Le 01/10/13 15:39, Philippe Verdy a écrit :
    In plain text, we would just use the [s|z] notation without
    care about presentation & font sizes used in the rendered rich
    text page. It correctly represent the intended alternation
    without giving more importance to one base letter.
    But it you wanted to allow plain text search with collators, you
    would need to choose one as the base letter and the other
    one as a combining diacritic with ignored higher-level
    differences, using either US English or British/International
    English to fix the base letter (the other letter would be an
    interlinear annotation for the second orthography, either above
    or below the base letter).


    Interlinear annotation… Yes, of course, you could write
    anathemati<U+FFF9>z<U+FFFA>s<U+FFFB>e. Halas, the characters
        U+FFF9    INTERLINEAR ANNOTATION ANCHOR
        U+FFFA    INTERLINEAR ANNOTATION SEPARATOR
        U+FFFB    INTERLINEAR ANNOTATION TERMINATOR
    are not supported by any software I know.






    2013/10/1 Steffen Daode <[email protected]
    <mailto:[email protected]>>

        Khaled Hosny <[email protected]
        <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
         |Using TeX:
         |
         |  \def\s{${}^{\rm s}_{\rm z}$}

        Using groff:

          #!/bin/sh -

          cat << \! > t.tr <http://t.tr>
          .de zs
          . nr #1 \\w'z'
          \\Z'\
          \\v'-.25v's\
          \\h'-\\n(#1u'\
          \\v'.5v'z\
          '\
          \\h'\\n(#1u'
          . rr #1
          ..
          Fraterni
          .zs
          e.
          !

          groff t.tr <http://t.tr> > t.ps <http://t.ps>
          ps2pdf t.ps <http://t.ps>
          rm t.tr <http://t.tr> t.ps <http://t.ps>
          exit 0

        (Can surely be tweaked.)

         |Regards,
         |Khaled

        Ciao,

        --steffen


        ---------- Message transféré ----------
        From: Khaled Hosny <[email protected]
        <mailto:[email protected]>>
        To: Leo Broukhis <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>>
        Cc: unicode Unicode Discussion <[email protected]
        <mailto:[email protected]>>
        Date: Tue, 1 Oct 2013 11:09:31 +0200
        Subject: Re: COMBINING OVER MARK?
        On Mon, Sep 30, 2013 at 05:51:09PM -0700, Leo Broukhis wrote:
        > Hi All,
        >
        > Attached is a part of page 36 of  Henry Alford's *The
        Queen's English: a
        > manual of idiom and usage (1888)* [
        > http://archive.org/details/queensenglishman00alfo]
        >
        > Is the way to indicate alternative s/z spellings used there
        plain text
        > (arguably, if it can be done with a typewriter, it is plain
        text)

        I see a typeset book not an output of a typewriter.

        > or rich text (ignoring the font size of letters s and z)?
        >
        > If it's the latter, what's the markup to achieve it?

        Using TeX:

          \def\s{${}^{\rm s}_{\rm z}$}

          49. How are we to decide between {\it s} and {\it z} in
        such words as
          anathemati\s{}e, cauteri\s{}e, criti\-ci\s{}e,
        deodori\s{}e, dogmati\s{}e,
          fraterni\s{}e, and the rest? Many of these are derived from
        Greek
          \bye

        Regards,
        Khaled






Reply via email to