Re: Decomposing Diacritics Allowed?

From: Mark E. Davis (
Date: Thu Dec 16 1999 - 23:48:21 EST

The answers to your questions are found in, with documentation on

For example,


has no decomposition.


"James E. Agenbroad" wrote:

> Thursday, December 16, 1999
> Unicoders,
> Does "dynamic composition" and "equivalent sequences" (2.0, p.2-9)
> include composition of combining characters from their parts? Some
> examples:
> Is U+0306 (brev) followed by U+0307 (dot above) the same as U+0310
> (candribindu)?
> Is U+0301 (acute) twice the same as U+030B (double acute)?
> Is U+307 (dot above) twice the same as U+308 (diaresis)?
> Examples 2 and 3 would need careful lateral placement to avoid
> unwanted overlap. The "from the center out" rule would solve the
> order of codes in the first example and it doesn't matter in the other
> two.
> If this has been decided and recorded could someone point me to it?
> If it has not should it be? I view all three examples as undesirable, but
> at the same time I must admit that I favor decomposition of multiple
> combining characters for Vietnamese (U+1EA4 and following).
> Regards,
> Jim Agenbroad ( )
> The above are purely personal opinions, not necessarily the official
> views of any government or any agency of any.
> Phone: 202 707-9612; Fax: 202 707-0955; US mail: I.T.S. Dev.Gp.4, Library
> of Congress, 101 Independence Ave. SE, Washington, D.C. 20540-9334 U.S.A.

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:56 EDT