Kenneth Whistler <firstname.lastname@example.org> wrote
> New summary for the impatient:
> A new character, COMBINING DOT ABOVE RIGHT, should *NOT* be encoded.
> It was already proposed two years ago, and has been considered and
> turned down in the context of the issues raised by Kiatgak.
Thanks for setting me straight on this, Ken. I was not aware of the
history of this proposal, and in particular I did not know that a
solution had already been made available to the same individuals.
I am glad to see that the "O with northeast dot" is considered just a
glyph variant of "O with north dot" (U+022E and U+022F) and therefore
can be encoded with normal Unicode techniques. That is much better
than hearing "oh, you have to use the Such-and-So font technology by
MumbleCorp" or "just use my favorite markup language."
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:07 EDT