Re: Entity for apostrophe?

Russell Steven Shawn O'Connor (roconnor@wronski.math.uwaterloo.ca)
Wed, 30 Jul 1997 15:46:08 -0400 (EDT)


Date: Wed, 30 Jul 1997 15:46:08 -0400 (EDT)
From: "Russell Steven Shawn O'Connor" <roconnor@wronski.math.uwaterloo.ca>
To: www-html@w3.org
cc: Matt Corks <mvcorks@undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca>
Subject: Re: Entity for apostrophe?
In-Reply-To: <Pine.SOL.3.95q.970730144312.23031A-100000@wronski.math.uwaterloo.ca>
Message-ID: <Pine.SOL.3.95q.970730153206.23031C-100000@wronski.math.uwaterloo.ca>

On Wed, 30 Jul 1997, Russell Steven Shawn O'Connor wrote:

> What should be added is
> <!ENTITY apo  CDATA "&#700;">
> 
> Character number 700 is unabiguously an apostrophe.  (I think that is the
> correct character number)

I was wrong.  Actually the UNICODE 2.0 book was wrong.  I was fortunately
glancing through the online errata just now.

It turns out character 700 is a modifier letter apostrophe.

<BLOCKQUOTE 
CITE="http://www.unicode.org/unicode/uni2errata/Apostrophe.htm">
In the case of an apostrophe, 

U+02BC MODIFIER LETTER APOSTROPHE is preferred where the character is to
represent a modifier letter (for example, in transliterations to indicate
a glottal stop). In the latter case, it is also referred to as a letter
apostrophe.

U+2019 RIGHT SINGLE QUOTATION MARK is preferred where the
character is to represent a punctuation mark, as in "We've been here
before." In the latter case, U+2019 is also referred to as a punctuation
apostrophe.
</BLOCKQUOTE>

So yes, <!ENTITY apo CDATA "&#8217;"> is would be resonable and correct.

-- 
Russell O'Connor                           roconnor@uwaterloo.ca
    <URL:http://www.undergrad.math.uwaterloo.ca/%7Eroconnor/>
"And truth irreversibly destroys the meaning of its own message"
-- Anindita Dutta, "The Paradox of Truth, the Truth of Entropy"