Ancient Greek apostrophe marking elision

Richard Wordingham via Unicode unicode at
Sat Jan 26 21:53:06 CST 2019

On Sun, 27 Jan 2019 01:55:29 +0000
James Kass via Unicode <unicode at> wrote:

> Richard Wordingham replied to Asmus Freytag,
>  >> To make matters worse, users for languages that "should" use
>  >> U+02BC aren't actually consistent; much data uses U+2019 or
>  >> U+0027. Ordinary users can't tell the difference (and spell
>  >> checkers seem not successful in enforcing the practice).  
>  >
>  > That appears to contradict Michael Everson's remark about a
>  > Polynesian need to distinguish the two visually.  
> Does it?
> U+02BC /should/ be used but ordinary users can't tell the difference 
> because the glyphs in their displays are identical, resulting in much 
> data which uses U+2019 or U+0027.  I don't see any contradiction.

I had assumed that Polynesians would be writing with paper and ink.  It
depends on what 'tell the difference' means.  In normal parlance it
means that they are unaware of the difference in the symbols; you are
assuming that it means that printed material doesn't show the

In general, handwritten differences can show up in various ways.  For
example, one can find a slight, unreliable difference in the relative
positioning of characters that reflects the difference in the usage of

Of course, Asmus's facts have to be unreliable.  It's like someone
typing U+1142A NEWA LETTER MHA for Sanskrit <U+11434 NEWA LETTER HA,
U+11442 NEWA SIGN VIRAMA, U+11429 NEWA LETTER MA>, which we've been
assured would never happen.  There must be something wrong with reality.


More information about the Unicode mailing list