From: Peter Kirk (email@example.com)
Date: Wed Jul 23 2003 - 18:15:13 EDT
On 23/07/2003 14:18, Mark Davis wrote:
>This all depends on whether the UTC approves, at the upcoming meeting
>in August, the proposal to extend the use of CGJ to allow for
>inclusion within sequences of combining marks in order to prevent
>reordering of those marks.
>Of course, it could be used right now for that purpose, in the sense
>that it would have that effect, and there is nothing in TUS that would
>prevent its usage. But, as you point out, it would be far better if
>the semantics of the character were explicitly extended so that it was
>clear to people that this is a recommended usage.
>► “Eppur si muove” ◄
Understood. I would certainly hope for an explicit UTC decision to
support this use of CGJ. My point in much of what I have been writing
today is that this use of CGJ is not some kind of abuse of a character
for a totally inappropriate purpose, but a specific use of it in line
with its existing generally intended use and implemented by default in
systems which follow the Unicode recommendations.
-- Peter Kirk firstname.lastname@example.org http://web.onetel.net.uk/~peterkirk/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jul 23 2003 - 19:04:06 EDT