Thomas 'PointedEars' Lahn <PointedEars@web.de> writes:

> IBTD. For example, in English it is customary (and AIUI expected) to use
> the character that ’ represents should be used to delimit a quotation
> within direct speech (which itself should be delimited by “ and
> ”. (I gathered that from reading several English books.)

There aren’t any universal ‘English’ quotation mark rules. What you
describe is the typical order in U.S. and Canadian English, while it
is the other way round in British English.

The Unicode situation of the apostrophe might be unfortunate, but if it
actually had a dedicated character for it, the character would still be
represented by the same glyph as the right single quotation mark in
actual usage, just as it is the case in any properly printed matter.

If you worry about readability, excessive quotation marks are usually
frowned upon by experienced typographs anyway, so it wouldn’t be a bad
idea to try to get rid of those first.

(Everybody is free to make up his own rule book, of course, but
shouldn’t be surprised if typographers call that by names that I would
not want to repeat on a family forum; that also goes for double spaces
between sentences, by the way

--
||| hexadecimal EBB
o-o decimal 3771
--oOo--( )--oOo-- octal 7273
205 goodbye binary 111010111011