On Mon, 6 Jan 1997, Maurice wrote:
> Invisible hyphenation is oftimes used in the Khmer language sometimes in
> conjunction with a hyphen being used elsewhere in the document, so I
> would also like to know what character is best used (not zero-width
> non-joiner because that is used for word breaks!).
What is the difference between a word break and an invisible hyphenation
point? My guess is that is is a difference of priority: If line-splitting
at a word break is possible without too much stretching, this is preferred
to hyphenating. Then this would be similar to the distinction of major
and minor hyphenating points in languages such as German.
Currently, Unicode/ISO 10646 only contains one version (priority level)
of soft hyphen and zero width non-breaking space. There may be a need
for more levels. How many levels would be needed? In the case of German,
two levels would be a wide improvement, three levels would cover even
more cases, but in theory, there is no upper limit. The practical
limit may be around four. How does this look in other languages?
Is the addition of such codepoints to Unicode/ISO 10646 needed, or
desirable?
Regards, Martin.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:33 EDT