From: Michael Everson (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Thu Jun 10 2004 - 12:45:15 CDT
At 17:11 +0100 2004-06-10, Anto'nio Martins-Tuva'lkin wrote:
>What about U+0251 U+0361 U+0302 U+028A ? After a "double" diacritical,
>any further combining character could take as its base the "pair" of
>spacing characters "under" the said double diacritical, shouldn't it?
I tried that in TextEdit, which is pretty smart, and the second
diacritic didn't centre over the pair, but rather over the 0251. But
I guess that's the only choice, and it would be a question of making
a precomposed glyph.
>Note that, U+0251 U+0361 U+0302 U+028A as given by BabelMap+Code2000
>(see <a~^u.gif> attached) is not productively different from U+0251
>U+0302 U+0361 U+028A (see <a^~u.gif> attached)...
OS X does it correctly. (Though I didn't see your gif.)
-- Michael Everson * * Everson Typography * * http://www.evertype.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jun 10 2004 - 12:50:11 CDT