At 19:27 -0600 2002-06-29, John H. Jenkins wrote: >I must point out that for English (and a lot of other languages), >the use of ZWJ to control ligation is considered improper. The ZWJ >technique for requesting ligatures is intended to be limited to >cases where the word is spelled incorrectly if *not* ligated
What! No! Look at my paper and the examples of Runic and Old Hungarian and Irish. There are examples where ligation is used on a nonce-basis, not having anything to do with global ligation or "correctness". >(and similarly ZWNJ is intended to prevent ligature formation where >that would make the word spelled incorrectly). The kind and degree >of ligation in English is generally considered a sylistic issue and >is best left to higher-level protocols. Thus saith Unicode 3.2. It doesn't go so far as to say what you did. Maybe Book needs to check the text some on this point. We should have consensus. -- Michael Everson *** Everson Typography *** http://www.evertype.com
