![]() ![]() In handwriting, a ligature is made by joining two or more characters in an atypical fashion by merging their parts, or by writing one above or inside the other. A widely used Th ligature in a handwriting-style typeface Manuscripts in the fourteenth century employed hundreds of such abbreviations. Scribes also used notational abbreviations to avoid having to write a whole character in one stroke. In many script forms, characters such as h, m, and n had their vertical strokes superimposed. For example, in blackletter, letters with right-facing bowls ( b, o, and p) and those with left-facing bowls ( c, e, o, d, g and q) were written with the facing edges of the bowls superimposed. Others conjoined letters for aesthetic purposes. Medieval scribes who wrote in Latin increased their writing speed by combining characters and by introducing notational abbreviations. Īround the 9th and 10th centuries, monasteries became a fountainhead for these type of script modifications. However, in Nordic texts a particular type of ligature appeared for ll and tt, referred to as "broken l" and "broken t". ![]() During the medieval era several conventions existed (mostly diacritic marks). Doubles ( Geminated consonants) during the Roman Republic era were written as a sicilicus. Merchants especially needed a way to speed up the process of written communication and found that conjoining letters and abbreviating words for lay use was more convenient for record keeping and transaction than the bulky long forms. These new glyphs emerge alongside the proliferation of writing with a stylus, whether on paper or clay, and often for a practical reason: faster handwriting. Other notable ligatures, such as the Brahmic abugidas and the Germanic bind rune, figure prominently throughout ancient manuscripts. The earliest known script Sumerian cuneiform and Egyptian hieratic both include many cases of character combinations that gradually evolve from ligatures into separately recognizable characters. Specify container: 'body' in Dropdown's config.See also: Bind rune and scribal abbreviation Side note: perhaps I'm too demanding but, by comparison with prior versions, I find Bootstrap 5 difficult to work with and poorly documented, at least at this point in time. I've smoke tested it in both latest Vue 2 ( 2.7.10) and latest Vue 3 ( 3.2.40). The solution seems to work in all cases, including inside 3d transformed ancestors. It might not be necessary, but to me it makes a lot of sense. Additionally, I'm moving the menu back to its original place in DOM once the dropdown is closed. uses TripleN's idea to append the menu to, after Popper positioned it.uses Nikola's idea to give the menu position: fixed, so Popper does the heavy lifting of positioning. ![]() If someone knows how to achieve this in Bootstrap 5 without having to meddle with DOM ourselves, I'd be delighted to learn how.Įventually I gave up and ended up moving the menu in DOM myself, after Popper positions it: I've spent hours going through Bootstrap 5's and Popper's documentation and examples, trying to find a way to do this simple task: specify a target container for popper content. This particular task used to be easy in prior versions of Bootstrap. append the popper content to while dropdown is open.allow Popper (used internally by Bootstrap 5) to position the dropdown (the popper content) correctly,.In my estimation, the correct solution would be to do both: dropdown has any valid transform value other than none ( spec ref). dropdown-menu to, so it stops working as soon as one of the ancestors of. TripleN's answer doesn't position the dropdown correctly.I find both existing answers valuable, but neither complete: ![]()
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |