Lists Home |
Date Index |
- From: Liam Quin <firstname.lastname@example.org>
- To: email@example.com
- Date: Sun, 24 Aug 1997 17:26:32 -0400 (EDT)
On Mon, 25 Aug 1997, Rick Jelliffe wrote:
> > From: Liam Quin <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> > The hyphen is 0255 octal (173 decimal). It is a hyphen, not a soft hyphen.
> > There is no soft hyphen in Latin 1.
> > I don't have the necessary copy of Unicode in front of me,
> In both Unicode 1.0 and Unicode 2.0 ­ is called "soft hyphen"
> or "discretionary hyphen", so it is available, but perhaps not reliably
> supported by 8859-1 applications.
Not supported at all would be a fairer way to put it!
At any rate not by _conforming_ 8859-1 applications, as far as I
understand it... in the same way that most SGML applications don't
treat &x; as a syntax error even when it's illegal in ISO C or FORTRAN :-)
I don't have a copy of 8859 any more to check, but if the hyphen chracter
is to be treated as a soft hyphen, there's no way to type a hard hyphen...
> Also available is the zero-width space ​
> For example, supercali​fragalistic&x200B;expialladocious.
Perhaps, but to claim that this is more readable to humans than
would be absurd. If you hadn't omitted the # in the 2nd reference, the
length would have been the same too. Using &hy; is even better.
You can always do
<!--* hy: soft (discretionary) hyphenation point: *-->
<!Entity hy '​'>
Liam Quin -- the barefoot typographer -- Toronto
lq-text: freely available Unix text retrieval
email address: liamquin, at host: interlog dot com
xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers
Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/
To unsubscribe, send to email@example.com the following message;
List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (firstname.lastname@example.org)