- From: Henrik Andersson <henke@henke37.cjb.net>
- Date: Wed, 10 Jul 2013 21:24:51 +0200
- To: John Hudson <tiro@tiro.com>, www-style@w3.org
John Hudson skriver: > On 10/07/13 1:18 AM, John Daggett wrote: > >> Note: ordinals are not superscripts even though they are often >> confused with them. > > More precisely, an ordinal is a text unit consisting of a number > followed by an alphabetic sequence, whose purpose is usually to > adjectivise the number. Looked at another way, an ordinal is an > abbreviated form of writing the adjectival form, e.g. 6th instead of > sixth. In terms of display, there are three common conventions for > ordinals: 1) using normal alphabetic glyphs, 2) using superscript > alphabetic glyphs, 3) using underlined superscript alphabetic glyphs. > The latter conventions is both locale and type design specific, so some > fonts will provide for Iberian and Italian ordinals, e.g. 2ª and 8º, > with underlined superscripts and others with plain superscripts. > > The OpenType Layout <ordn> features provide for mapping from regular > lowercase letters to ordinal indicator letters, which may be identical > to regular superscript letters, or might be underlined superscript > variants. In practice, there is a fair amount of variety in how > different font makers approach this feature, so results of applying > <ordn> will vary. Some font makers map only the Iberian underlined {a} > and {o} in the <ordn> feature, recommending to users to apply the <sups> > feature if they want to use plain superscripts in ordinals. > > JH > > > > Unicode defines some variant selector character points. Are they used here?
Received on Wednesday, 10 July 2013 19:25:29 UTC