Re: A few questions about decomposition, equvalence and rendering

From: Lukas Pietsch (Lukas.Pietsch@pluto.uni-freiburg.de)
Date: Tue Feb 05 2002 - 12:04:07 EST

Previous message: DougEwell2@cs.com: "(no subject)"
In reply to: John Cowan: "Re: A few questions about decomposition, equvalence and rendering"
Next in thread: John Cowan: "Re: A few questions about decomposition, equvalence and rendering"
Reply: John Cowan: "Re: A few questions about decomposition, equvalence and rendering"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

John Cowan wrote:
>
> Eh? U+1FC1 *is* nonspacing. The U+1Fxx ones are the spacing
> compatibility equivalents, except for this one.
>

U+1FC1 is spacing in all the fonts that I've seen. And it decomposes to
U+00A8 U+0342 (canonically), i.e. to a sequence of spacing plus
non-spacing character. At least it did so in Unicode 3.0.

Not that I would bother much - I have no idea where that character
should ever be used.

Lukas Pietsch

Previous message: DougEwell2@cs.com: "(no subject)"
In reply to: John Cowan: "Re: A few questions about decomposition, equvalence and rendering"
Next in thread: John Cowan: "Re: A few questions about decomposition, equvalence and rendering"
Reply: John Cowan: "Re: A few questions about decomposition, equvalence and rendering"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Feb 05 2002 - 12:01:23 EST