From: Leo Broukhis (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Wed Apr 06 2011 - 16:56:49 CDT
On Wed, Apr 6, 2011 at 2:37 PM, Asmus Freytag <email@example.com> wrote:
> On 4/6/2011 2:16 PM, Leo Broukhis wrote:
>> Combining up tack above It can be represented by
>> U+0304 COMBINING MACRON U+030D COMBINING VERTICAL LINE ABOVE
> 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