From: Mahesh T. Pai (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Tue Feb 14 2006 - 04:59:10 CST
Vinod Kumar said on Tue, Feb 14, 2006 at 03:34:31PM +0530,:
> The original Unicode specification is adequate to handle Chillus. There is
> no need to encode the chillus separately. The proposal to encode that was
> approved by Unicode some time back should be reconsidered and rejected just
> as proposals to encode eye-lash ra for Devanagari was.
> Vinod Kumar
> Project IndiX
So, which code sequence should form chillus?
cons + chandrakkala + zwj?
cons + chandrakkala?
But more importantly, if you have already decided on it, why have a
-- Mahesh T. Pai || http://paivakil.blogspot.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Feb 14 2006 - 05:06:06 CST