From: Kent Karlsson (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Mon Nov 03 2003 - 10:01:14 EST
[I'm not sure why this Hebrew thread has migrated back to the
general Unicode list (from the Hebrew list); but my comments
below aren't specific to Hebrew.]
Jony Rosenne wrote:
> > As they will share the same combining class 220, the
> > canonical ordering will preserve their relative order
> Although normalization preserves the order of combining marks
> of the same
> class, I think no meaning should be attached to it, for two reasons:
> The collation algorithm ignores such differences in order
It certainly does NOT ignore such differences, at any point.
However, in MOST cases such differences are at level 2, rather
than level 1, and so they are rarely noticable in practice.
However, the UCA does ignore differences between order of
*"non-blocking"* (**different** non-zero combining classes)
combining marks **when processing contractions**.
14651, the corresponding ISO standard, has no such nicety
though, and the order of combining marks is always significant.
<a, ring above, dot below> is *likey* to collate differently than
<a, dot below, ring above> (though it does depend on the tailoring).
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Nov 03 2003 - 10:51:31 EST