From: Philippe Verdy (email@example.com)
Date: Wed Nov 05 2003 - 06:24:00 EST
From: "John Hudson" <firstname.lastname@example.org>
> At 07:20 PM 11/4/2003, Jony Rosenne wrote:
> >I was thinking we need a zero width non-breaking character. Maybe we mean
> >the same.
> I think Peter and I were thinking of two characters: one spacing and one
> zero-width, both non-breaking. Both would be used for instances in which a
> base character is deliberately absent from the text but when combining
> characters remain present. Hebrew qere/ketiv seem to be the most obvious
> employment for such 'elided bases', but there may be other uses: for
> example, in palaeographical studies in which a manuscript or inscription
> damaged in such a way that the base letter is obliterated but diacritic
> marks remain.
The obliterated character needed for paleolitic studies, or to encode any
texts in which the character is not recognizable already exists: isn't it
the REPLACEMENT CHARACTER?
Such base character should be rendered with a spacing glyph (for example a
circle filled with a grey pattern, or the rounded box with oblique hatches
that we sometimes see in charts) It is not the same as the missing letter
which is not there because of alteration of the source document.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Nov 05 2003 - 07:16:47 EST