W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > whatwg@whatwg.org > June 2007

[whatwg] several messages

From: Ian Hickson <ian@hixie.ch>
Date: Mon, 25 Jun 2007 20:32:31 +0000 (UTC)
Message-ID: <Pine.LNX.4.64.0706252028350.14519@dhalsim.dreamhost.com>
On Mon, 25 Jun 2007, Kristof Zelechovski wrote:
>
> If there is a character set that sports both, it must be used to put 
> down some human language.  My point there is no language that could make 
> use of this distinction by having both &uuml; and &utrema;.  There are 
> languages that use &uuml; and theoretically there could be ones that use 
> &utrema;, although I do not know of any valid case (I consider the 
> French case invalid).

On Mon, 25 Jun 2007, Kristof Zelechovski wrote:
> 
> A stressed schwa is present in Polish maritime dialect as well (Kasz?bszczi)
> and Slovaks write "m?so" for "miaso" (meat), but that is not the point.  All
> such uses can be covered under the hood of the dieresis; I only want the
> true umlaut to be distinct, not as a code point but as an entity name.

On Mon, 25 Jun 2007, K?i?tof ?elechovski wrote:
>
> Could I have an example of &otrema; please?  Something along the lines 
> of zo?logy, but actually required?  Not that I doubt your knowledge of 
> Dutch but I would like to have it as a demonstration. Chris

This is all academic. HTML is based on Unicode, Unicode doesn't 
distinguish these characters. Also, we can't change the entity name, we 
would just be adding a redundant character that doesn't work in older UAs.

-- 
Ian Hickson               U+1047E                )\._.,--....,'``.    fL
http://ln.hixie.ch/       U+263A                /,   _.. \   _\  ;`._ ,.
Things that are impossible just take longer.   `._.-(,_..'--(,_..'`-.;.'
Received on Monday, 25 June 2007 13:32:31 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Wednesday, 22 January 2020 16:58:56 UTC