>Actually I think there's a dotless j proposed for math. Practically, speaking
as a person who does have to compose accented vowels on the fly when a font
isn't available, I can say that I make a lot of use of the dotless i in the Mac
code table. If Unicode had a dotless j, it would really be a great _convenience_
to users.
And Unicode will continue to descend from the original design principles ever
deeper into the mire of presentation forms.
>With a powerful typesetting package one can control kerning and baseline shift
to get proper placement, which is what I was talking about. You don't have to
have a fully composed glyph, but in the absence of a dotless j you can't do
anything.
So, Michael, I think what you're needing is a glyph, and a way to access it in
your document. The glyph you can design (I know this about you), if it's not
already in a font you use. As for how to access it in your document, the
preferred way is that you enter LATIN SMALL LETTER J (using your favourite input
method), and that your software figure out that the correct way to display this
when a superior diacritic follows is to ditch the dot. If your software is not
there yet, then you (or whoever) can always allocate a DOTLESS J character for
your (or their) own use in the PUA block. That would be *a lot* better than
adding LATIN SMALL LETTER DOTLESS J to the standard for the duration of time,
along with all of the concomittant normalisation issues, etc.
Peter
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:48 EDT