The names do NOT always provide correct descriptions of the characters. This is especially true for "digraph" and "ligature" (and in the case of U+00E6 too), as well as (e.g.) SCRIPT CAPITAL P, which is neither script, nor capital (it's lowercase), though it is a p... In addition, there are different flavours of ligatures. E.g., it is quite legitimate to render, e.g. LIGATURE FI as an f followed by an i, no ligation, whereas that is not allowed for the ae ligature/letter, nor for the oe ligature.
/kent k From: Pim Blokland > John Cowan schreef: > > > Digraphs and ligatures are both made by combining two glyphs. In a > digraph, > > the glyphs remain separate but are placed close together. > In a ligature, > > the glyphs are fused into a single glyph. > > Oh, in that case I must say I think the UnicodeData.txt file > doesn't do a > very good job. > For instance, the Danish ae (U+00E6) is not designated a > ligature, but the > Dutch ij (U+0133) is, even though the "a" and "e" are clearly fused > together, while the "i" and "j" aren't.