Re: visible glyphs for U+2062 and similar characters

Date: Fri May 09 2003 - 12:18:09 EDT

  • Next message: Sarasvati: "Re: [Unicode] Suggestion to list owner"

    > (2) What's the normative (if there's such a thing) rendering behavior
    > of a sequence with U+2062-like characters?

    There isn't any normative behaviour, but the default assumption is that
    INVISIBLE TIMES is normally invisible. There is a reason why 2061..2063 are
    called *invisible* operators. Note, for instance the explicit comment for
    2063: "...when no visible comma is used between multiple indices".

    Of course, for *any* invisible character including controls, there are
    contexts in which it is appropriate to display some visible representation
    of it. But normally, they are meant to be invisible.

    - Peter

    Peter Constable

    Non-Roman Script Initiative, SIL International
    7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd., Dallas, TX 75236, USA
    Tel: +1 972 708 7485

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri May 09 2003 - 13:20:37 EDT