From: Michael Everson (email@example.com)
Date: Wed Apr 06 2011 - 17:15:02 CDT
On 6 Apr 2011, at 22:56, Leo Broukhis wrote:
> 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.
Because David sees it as a single fused glyph. I agree with him.
>> 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.
> 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?
Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Apr 06 2011 - 17:17:13 CDT