sara am ordering (was RE: Why is U+17C1 of General category Mc while U+0E40 and U+0EC) are of category Lo ?

From: Peter Constable (petercon@microsoft.com)
Date: Wed Mar 31 2004 - 10:54:09 EST

  • Next message: Doug Ewell: "Re: What is the principle?"

    Kent:

    Your doc says,

    <quote, emphasis added>
    And should be ordered as followed by (**which is the logical sequence, despite the Unicode compatibility decomposition**).
    </quote>

    What do you mean here by "logical sequence"? That that's how it should be interpreted phonologically and for sorting purposes, or that that is the correct encoded sequence for decomposed representations?

    If the latter, that seems to me to be quite wrong: I would not expect *any* data that includes a decomposed representation of sara am to have the sequence < C, sara aa, nikkahit >: it would always be the other way around: < C, nikkahit, sara aa >.

    Of course, if the former, I would agree.

    Peter
     
    Peter Constable
    Globalization Infrastructure and Font Technologies
    Microsoft Windows Division



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Mar 31 2004 - 12:01:49 EST