From: Peter Kirk (peterkirk@qaya.org)
Date: Thu Mar 17 2005 - 04:41:11 CST
On 17/03/2005 00:26, Patrick Andries wrote:
> ...
>
> In general, the Canonical Combining Classes represent the
> typographical interaction potential of the corresponding combining
> character ...
This is what the text of the standard claims, but in fact it doesn't
work with these "fixed position classes". Combining marks in different
fixed position classes, e.g. in Hebrew, are in fact in the same position
relative to the base characters and so necessarily interact
typographically. It seems to me that these "fixed position classes" are
a historical relic with little or no real utility and some unfortunate
side-effects. Unfortunately these classes were frozen for stability
reasons without being properly reviewed, so we are stuck with them, and
with the need for kludges e.g. inserting CGJ to preserve certain
significant distinctions through normalisation.
-- Peter Kirk peter@qaya.org (personal) peterkirk@qaya.org (work) http://www.qaya.org/ -- No virus found in this outgoing message. Checked by AVG Anti-Virus. Version: 7.0.308 / Virus Database: 266.7.3 - Release Date: 15/03/2005
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Mar 17 2005 - 04:42:28 CST