On Sun, Dec 1, 2024 at 11:27 PM Asmus Freytag via Unicode <[email protected]> wrote: > What you are arguing is that one should not use that fallback any > longer. I have no arguments with that, but in this case, the fallback > was used.
Let me break it down into two points. Starting with the less controversial, when counting the use of the capital ẞ, one should count ß in uppercase contexts separately from SS. Secondly, is there a position that ß should be used in uppercase contexts, especially as opposed to using ẞ? If there's absolutely no such movement, I think it clear that ß should be counted as a glyph variant of ẞ in uppercase contexts. Fallbacks like that are almost always normalized; older texts usually have long-s turned to s and scriptorial abbreviations expanded when published, for example. If there is a serious movement against ẞ and for ß as uppercase, then I'm wrong. I'm certainly biased towards having neat upper-lowercase pairs. -- The standard is written in English . If you have trouble understanding a particular section, read it again and again and again . . . Sit up straight. Eat your vegetables. Do not mumble. -- _Pascal_, ISO 7185 (1991)
