Re: starters and non-starters

From: Jon Hanna (
Date: Tue Feb 02 2010 - 17:11:30 CST

  • Next message: Mark E. Shoulson: "Re: starters and non-starters"

    spir wrote:
    > This means, I guess, that a combining character sequence's first character is guaranteed to be a starter, ie to have ccc=0.


    > I cannot find whether the converse statement is true: is a following character guaranteed to be a non-starter?

    They are, not only must the sequence start with a starter, but a starter
    starts a new sequence (which may be just itself). If this weren't so,
    then interpretation of a sequence of two starters would be ambiguous.

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Feb 02 2010 - 17:16:18 CST