Perhaps they should be. I wonder: When transcribing a foreign name (like a business name) that includes the ampersand, would a Swede use the "och" sign? I can't answer that.
In other words, does there exist a case where the ampersand and the "och" sign are not interchangeable? -----Original Message----- From: John Hudson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Date: Sun, 02 Dec 2001 16:33:04 -0800 To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Are these characters encoded? > At 15:16 12/2/2001, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote: > > >Then why not unify DIGIT THREE with HAN DIGIT THREE? > > I don't know enough about the Han encoding to answer that. Because they are > distinguished in existing character sets? Because someone has a need to > distinguish them in plain text? > > I'm not saying that the Swedish och sign should automatically be unified > with the ampersand. I'm simply pointing out that, as described to date on > this list, it is not clear that this sign needs to be separately encoded. > We know that is can be treated as a language-specific glyph variant because > Swedish readers apparently accept both forms to means exactly the same > thing. Whether such treatment is sufficient depends on whether there is > also need to distinguish the two forms, and to do so in plain text. I think > Michael Everson made a strong case for separate encoding of the Tironian et > sign, and I think a similarly strong case would need to be made for > separately encoding the Swedish och sign. > > I'm perfectly happy to include the och sign in my fonts, whether it is > encoded or not, and to provide mechanisms to access the glyph. At the > moment, though, I don't think it is clear whether it is best for this sign > to be encoded or not. What might be the impact on Swedish keyboard drivers? > Is the intention that a new och sign character should replace the ampersand > character in Swedish text processing, or should both be used? What is the > impact on existing documents? > > John Hudson > > Tiro Typeworks www.tiro.com > Vancouver, BC [EMAIL PROTECTED] > > ... es ist ein unwiederbringliches Bild der Vergangenheit, > das mit jeder Gegenwart zu verschwinden droht, die sich > nicht in ihm gemeint erkannte. > > ... every image of the past that is not recognized by the > present as one of its own concerns threatens to disappear > irretrievably. > Walter Benjamin > > > -- _______________________________________________ Get your free email from http://www.ranmamail.com Powered by Outblaze
