From: Kent Karlsson (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Tue Jun 03 2003 - 11:34:36 EDT
> Sorry, may be I was chosing the wrong diacritic (I was
> confused by its name, and I should have verified in the charts).
> Isn't U+0316 "COMBINING HORN" (combining class 216) what I
> wanted to use?
Let me cut my reply short: no.
> script which already has a lot of them and creates
> difficulties for their correct placement in the combined
> glyph-cluster layout, notably because Unicode allows any
> combination of multiple diacritics on base characters, even
> though such combinations were never used in any past
> language, and will probably never be used for the case of
> multiple diacritics
There are several cases where two diacritics are applied to the
same instance of a base letter. Several of which are also encoded
in precomposed form. There are also cases, for Lithuanian at least,
but maybe also for other languages, where three diacritics are
applied to an instance of a base letter, none of these combinations
have a precomposed version as a single character.
> combining classes, and not even with Korean which uses its
> own L+V*T* model,
L+V+T*. However, technically one *could* have used a base+
combining characters model also for Hangul.
> So it seems legitimate to reuse existing diacritics allowing
> them to create new ligated forms that could be documented as
> specific to a rare language, and implemented most accurately
I would strongly recommend against that.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Jun 03 2003 - 12:33:36 EDT