Re: German sharp S uppercase mapping
Asmus Freytag via Unicode <[email protected]>
| Newsgroups | gmane.text.unicode.general |
|---|---|
| Message-ID | <[email protected]> |
On 12/1/2024 2:24 PM, David Starner via Unicode wrote: > On Sun, Dec 1, 2024 at 3:42 PM Markus Scherer <[email protected]> wrote: >> No, that one is clearly a lowercase ß. > I disagree; that's clearly an eszett, between other uppercase > characters, and unless there's some linguistic weirdness going on, > like iPhone or eBook, that's a capital letter. No, it's not. > Glyphs have to be taken > in context, and in that case, it's clear they didn't intend for one > character in the middle of the word to be lowercase. That (writing a lowercase ß in ALLCAPS) being / having been an acceptable fallback, you can't assume anything based on context. You do need to consider the glyph (unless you have access to the underlying text buffer). > I could wonder > whether that's a bad glyph for the text, or one used by preference to > the ẞ style glyph, but in Latin-script German, in a modern Unicode > context, it makes no sense to maintain a distinction between an > uppercased lowercase ß and an uppercase ẞ. Uppercase("ß") should go to > "SS" or "ẞ", and a glyph looking like ß in an uppercase context should > be interpreted and written as U+1E9E, not U+00DF. The glyph is clearly not that for a capital letter - for one, it extends above the tops of all other capitals. Typical designs for capital forms of ß tend to be wider and a bit more squat in appearance. The distinction is quite noticeable. 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. A./