[XeTeX] : Re: wrong uccode of ß

[Ulrike Fischer]

Am Mon, 14 Apr 2008 12:55:37 +0200 schrieb Adam Twardoch:

> Ulrike Fischer wrote:
>> I have the impression they are a bit mixing the meaning "LATIN CAPITAL
>> LETTER SHARP S" and the look. I agree that a char with the meaning
>> "LATIN CAPITAL LETTER SHARP S" is necessary. It would also solve the
>> lowercase problem.  But why can this char not have some times the look
>> "ß" (if it can't be avoided) and sometimes "SS" or even "SZ"? 
>>   
> Ulrike,
> 
> the Unicode Standard does not prescribe the exact shape of ANY 
> character, and especially not of any letter.

Yes I know. But the document Martin mentioned
(http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/n2888.pdf) doesn't make the
impression as if they ever considered "SS" to be a possible shape for
"Capital ß".

> After all, we have many different kinds of the letter "a" or "g".
> Andreas Stötzner has prepared an exhaustive study of different (and
> still not all) possible stylistic variants of the uppercase ß:
> 
> http://www.signographie.de/cms/upload/pdf/SIGNA9_SHARP_S_variants.pdf

Here too: All this variants are connected. SS with two distinct S is not
considered as a possible variants for the char. T1-encoding is better in
this respect. There a position for the "SS"-char existed from the start
on. 

-- 
Ulrike Fischer