From: Kenneth Whistler (email@example.com)
Date: Fri Aug 08 2003 - 17:22:00 EDT
Thomas Widman suggested:
> Peter Kirk <firstname.lastname@example.org> writes:
> > On 08/08/2003 08:54, Philippe Verdy wrote:
> > > ... Could there be another codepoint assigned that has
> > >these properties:
> > >
> > >20CF;ZERO WIDTH SYMBOL;Sk;0;ON;<compat> 0020;;;;N;;;;;
> > > [...]
> > But I'm not sure that ZERO WIDTH SYMBOL is the best name, ...
> What would be a better name? ACCENT CARRIER?
How about: U+10FFFD UNNECESSARY CHARACTER ?
Philippe, you are tilting at windmills, here. There is no
chance that the UTC is going to consider such a character,
in my assessment, let alone give it the properties you
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Aug 08 2003 - 18:07:30 EDT