From: Mark E. Shoulson (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Tue Sep 14 2004 - 20:46:42 CDT
Philippe Verdy wrote:
> Good point, but is the ZWNJ control supposed to be used as a base
> character with a defined height? I thought it was just a control for
> indicating where ligatures are preferably to avoid when rendering,
> leaving it fully ignorable if the renderer has no other option than
> rendering the ligature. For this application, the following character
> was a base character.
> Other uses of ZWNJ before diacritics are in Indic scripts, or in the
> Hebrew proposals (in Public Review for Meteg), to control the meaning
> of the following character.
> So I do think that the LateX2e "compound word mark" should map to
> <ZWNJ,INVISIBLE LETTER> rather than just ZWNJ...
> The "(-)burg" abbreviation as "(-)b˘g" (with a non-spacing but
> non-combining breve) should then be encoded with the invisible letter,
> in combination with ZWNJ to make it non-spacing.)
Since INVISIBLE LETTER is spacing, wouldn't it make more sense to define
a ZERO WIDTH INVISIBLE LETTER than to have some weird meaning to ZWNJ
that makes it unspace a space? ZWIL seems like a pretty useful thing,
to me (if we agree that IL is useful in the first place).
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Sep 14 2004 - 20:48:35 CDT