From: Shriramana Sharma <>
Date: Mon, 22 Aug 2011 21:43:18 +0530

On 08/20/2011 10:54 AM, Shriramana Sharma wrote:
> On 08/19/2011 10:05 PM, Mark Davis ☕ wrote:
>> All of the property assignments to PUA characters (except the GC) are
>> purely informative.
> I just now noticed that you had excepted the GC in the above. Why is
> that? How are applications supposed to handle combining marks etc if in
> the PUA?

Mark, can you please reply to the above --

It seems that while it is true that GC=Co should be retained *in the
standard* to clearly identify the character as a PUA character, the
applications will still by changing that GC to Lo, Mc, Mn, No etc for
their internal private-agreement processing. So what is the exact nature
of your excepting the GC in your statement above?

Shriramana Sharma
Received on Mon Aug 22 2011 - 11:17:56 CDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Mon Aug 22 2011 - 11:17:56 CDT