Find and Replace - a tiny thing not working

[Chris26]

Windows10 up to date.The  Purchased Publisher.

Typing the following into "Find":  T'is - does not find this particular word, however "Tis" is found.

I have tried many combinations involving an apostrophe and it appears that the Find and replace can not recognise this form.

[walt.farrell]

Perhaps your actual text has a typographic (curly) apostrophe rather than a straight one?

[Chris26]

5 hours ago, walt.farrell said:

Perhaps your actual text has a typographic (curly) apostrophe rather than a straight one?

Ugh?  I only know curly apostrophes, you remember, those good old original ones from the days when we used to write things with a thing called....a, now what was it called?  Oh yes - a pen.  But the keyboard has only straight apostrophes Walt.  Here it is:  ' and this is what I used to write the word :  T'is.

[walt.farrell]

35 minutes ago, Chris26 said:

and this is what I used to write the word :  T'is.

I have no doubt that's what you used to write the word in your text (and in the Find dialog), but what actually ended up in the text? Publisher prefers the curly versions, and changes straight apostrophes to typographic ones unless you tell it not to (perhaps even then). So try Finding T’is and see if that works.

[Chris26]

Walt, the glyph browser has U+0027 as the code for this.  Well double clicking on the apostrophe in the glyph inserts it into the text, great.  That's fine.  Thankyou for that.  However I have now the problem that I do not know how to use the U 0027 becasuse double clicking this glyph into the FIND dialogue does not work, and holding U while typing the numbers does not work either in affinity text or the find dialogue, so I need educating here please..  I have never needed to use glyphs before, I used the windows keyboard UTF codes in the past but that was on the apple.  Since if the Find dialogue does not recognise a straight apostrophe, then it has no point trying to replace them using this method.   So I suppose I will have to do it manually.

EDIT:  OK, ALT + 0146 gives a much nicer looking apostrophe than affinity's glyphs.  Also it is accepted by the Find and Replace Dialogue, which I did not expect.  So Affinity might want to change this or not, or maybe it has its reasons for this I do not know.  But using the windows UTF code works perfectly.  

Here is the ALT + 0146   T’is  it's actually nicer than the curly one in Affinity's Glyphs which still looks too straight.  Yes, I know, I'm a perfectionist.

[walt.farrell]

There are several glyphs that may look like an apostrophe but aren't. And it's possible that Publisher is actually using the Unicode "right single quote", not one of the characters that has "apostrophe" in the name.

[Alfred]

2 hours ago, Chris26 said:

Here is the ALT + 0146   T’is  it's actually nicer than the curly one in Affinity's Glyphs which still looks too straight.  Yes, I know, I'm a perfectionist.

What is T’is, anyway??

[Chris26]

1 hour ago, walt.farrell said:

There are several glyphs that may look like an apostrophe but aren't. And it's possible that Publisher is actually using the Unicode "right single quote", not one of the characters that has "apostrophe" in the name.

Hi Walt, the problem is that glyph is not the same.  More to the point though, I can not get theseglyphs into the find and replace dialogue, I mean what the heck does the  U+Nummerical number mean when you hover over these glyphs in affinity?  The only way that glyphs go into the dialogue is via Windows own Unicode.  So these glyhs seem redundant in Affinity right?   An apostrophe from the glyphs is not the same as one typed in via unicode windows alt + numerical number, this is quicker and it works, in the find/replace as well.  Ok, so It really does not matter any more, just a small niggly thing of no consequence I suppose.  Windows own Alt unicode works for everything in Affinity so that is all that matters.  I’m happy!  or rather I Alt+0146 m  happy

1 hour ago, Alfred said:

What is T’is, anyway??

It is short for "This is" or more commonly "It is"  used in olde English vernacular and spoken even today, but I am using it for upper Medieval language.

[PaulEC]

12 minutes ago, Chris26 said:

It is short for "This is" or more commonly "It is"  used in olde English vernacular and spoken even today, but I am using it for upper Medieval language.

Shouldn't it be 'tis rather than t'is? (The apostrophe replaces the i of it.)

[Chris26]

1 hour ago, PaulEC said:

Shouldn't it be 'tis rather than t'is? (The apostrophe replaces the i of it.)

You are absolutely right, in grammatical rules yes  However IT IS - no letter is being replaced, nothing to replace the letter "I"  and since the Old English "This is" was the original meaning, the apostrophe is actually replacing the letter "H", and has been handed down now to mean "It Is" as well.  Hope this clarifies it nicely for you.

[GarryP]

Chris26, this might sound incredibly nit-picky – and I’m no expert in this area – but would anyone have written the word “T’is” in the Middle Ages?
As far as I know, the apostrophe wasn’t introduced into English until the 16th Century.

[walt.farrell]

9 minutes ago, Chris26 said:

You are absolutely right, in grammatical rules yes  However IT IS - no letter is being replaced, nothing to replace the letter "I"  and since the Old English "This is" was the original meaning, the apostrophe is actually replacing the letter "H", and has been handed down now to mean "It Is" as well.  Hope this clarifies it nicely for you.

There are ample historical references to 'tis though, and in its meaning "it is" the "i" has been elided, and replaced by the apostrophe.

I'd be interested in seeing a reference for the original being "this is", as that's not something I've ever heard.

[Chris26]

3 hours ago, GarryP said:

Chris26, this might sound incredibly nit-picky – and I’m no expert in this area – but would anyone have written the word “T’is” in the Middle Ages?
As far as I know, the apostrophe wasn’t introduced into English until the 16th Century.

Ah that is why I said the UPPER middle ages, however I should have been more precise  because my writing is around 1550 and strictly speaking this is beyond the High Middle ages, I simply see the end of Middle ages as being around the 1500 but that is my personal take rather than an historically accurate description.  Phew!  1000 - 1400 is high middle but in my circle anything before 1600 is medieval.  So has my T’is survived the interrogation?

EDIT:  Well the consensus of opinion is that I am wrong.   It should be ’tis, um.....however its earliest recorded use was indeed in the middle of 1400 and shakespeare used it in Hamlet and it was written as PualEC suggested.  Tail between my legs, ’tis a mournful sentiment I do now taste.   Still this has not resolved the fact that Affinity can not find glyphs and one can not type them into the search and find dialogue.

[GarryP]

That’s absolutely fine Chris26. Like I said, I’m no expert, I just remember reading something somewhere. Since you’re going for historical accuracy I thought it best to mention it just in case (even if I was/am wrong).
It’s probably difficult to know exactly when people first smuggled apostrophes over from France and started breeding them, or who did it.
My guess is that it was some butcher’s as they seem to have plenty to throw around (see what I did there?).

[PaulEC]

Removed, as, re-reading the thread, the problem seems to be solved.