On 2/13/2013 6:00 PM, Leo Broukhis wrote:
Everything dialectology-related is a "fancy presentation" of the
phoneme attribute markup.
Well, that's one view.
A./
Leo
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 5:51 PM, Asmus Freytag <asm...@ix.netcom.com> wrote:
On 2/13/2013 2:56 PM, Leo Broukhis wrote:
On Wed, Feb 13, 2013 at 11:31 AM, Andries Brouwer <a...@win.tue.nl> wrote:
I wondered how to code an s-j overstrike combination in Unicode.
I'd write "s ZWJ j" and use a font that has the appropriate ligature.
These features in Unicode aren't intended as just "hacks" to get the right
appearance. The idea is that you can encode the intention of the author more
directly. Unless the overstruck sj form happens to be nothing more than
fancy presentation of an otherwise normal <s, j> sequence.
A ZWJ doesn't let you indicate whether you want an overstuck form or some
other fused form, that choice would reside in the font - making the solution
font dependent - which doesn't quite seem the correct approach.
Otherwise, why not use the BS control code. In the old days of teletypes
that would nicely produce this "overstruck" effect. No need to define
another format character if all you want to do is restore the semantics of
that old control character.
A./
