Re: Proposal for Combining Up Tack Above

From: Leo Broukhis (
Date: Wed Apr 06 2011 - 16:56:49 CDT

  • Next message: Karl Pentzlin: "Re: Three modest proposals"

    On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 2:37 PM, Asmus Freytag <> wrote:
    > On 4/6/2011 2:16 PM, Leo Broukhis wrote:
    >> Combining up tack above It can be represented by
    > The question is not whether you can "build up" something that looks like the
    > proposed character, but whether the uptack "is" nothing but a combination of
    > these two.

    In the proposal, C.9 Can any of the proposed characters be encoded
    using a composed character sequence of either
    existing characters or other proposed characters? says "No". I've
    demonstrated that it is not true.
    There is no mention of this possibility in the proposal nor any
    justification as to why the proposed character must be represented by
    a single character.

    > I don't know anything about the proposed character, but somehow I doubt that
    > it's fundamentally a composite.

    FWIW, a named character sequence can be added for it.

    > Could be wrong, though.

    Under magnification, it looks like a true tack rather than a
    combination of a macron and a vertical line. Is that a satisfying
    condition for encoding?


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Apr 06 2011 - 16:58:27 CDT