Or better, at P5, define what is meant by this glyph/character in the
charDesc, and then use a <g> element to reference it.
I say "better" not just because it is P5, but also because using a
markup construct (the <g>) to represent this problematic thingummy
gives more opportunities for managing its display, retrieval etc. by
means of stylesheets etc. Whereas the entity "solution" simply hides the
problem under the carpet.
John Tone Young wrote:
> In Julia's position, my instinct would be to create a new entity for
> this character and worry about how to output it later. Perhaps this
> is merely dodging the question, but it does seem there are several
> plausible accounts of what the character actually 'is' so it might be
> wise to keep your options open.
> Quoting Julia Flanders <[log in to unmask]>:
>> In our text (Janet Little's _The Poetical Works
>> of Janet Little, the Scotch Milkmaid_, 1792), the
>> character appears to be
>> but as John Kennedy has noted it is set closer to
>> the baseline: its top is indeed well below
>> ascender height, whereas the apostrophes in this
>> text (for instance) have their tops at ascender
>> height. The text doesn't contain any single left
>> quotation marks used as such that I can find, but
>> its left double quotation marks are also set
>> higher than this character is.
>> best, Julia
>>> Is the character distinct from these Unicode characters:
>>> and any of the similar characters referenced on those pages? Or
>> could it
>>> be considered a variant of one or another?
>>> On Tue, 13 May 2008, John W Kennedy wrote:
>>>> Closely examining "Andr��: a Tragedy in Five Acts", by
>> William Du> nlap (New
>>>> York, T. & J. Swords, 1798), I see that the
>>>> symbol is neither a superscripted
>>>> c, for it has the basic comma shape, nor a left single quote,
>> for, wh> ile it
>>>> closely resembles one, it is closer to the baseline, so that it
>> dips > below x
>>>> height, which a single quote does not do, and its top is well
>> below a> scender
>>>> height, which a single quote meets.
>>>> In short, I believe an application to the Unicode Consortium is
>> in or> der; at
>>>> present, this character is neither accepted nor in the pipeline.
>> I wo> uld
>>>> volunteer to shepherd it myself, but I am completely without
>> credenti> als and
>>>> so ignorant that I cannot even provide appropriate termini a quo
>> & ad> quem.
>>> David Sewell, Editorial and Technical Manager
>>> ROTUNDA, The University of Virginia Press
>>> PO Box 801079, Charlottesville, VA 22904-4318 USA
>>> Courier: 310 Old Ivy Way, Suite 302, Charlottesville VA 22903
>>> Email: [log in to unmask] Tel: +1 434 924 9973
>>> Web: http://rotunda.upress.virginia.edu/