Re: Normalisation stability, was: Compression through normalization

From: Rick McGowan (rick@unicode.org)
Date: Tue Nov 25 2003 - 14:41:35 EST

Next message: Peter Kirk: "Re: Normalisation stability, was: Compression through normalization"

Previous message: Mark Davis: "Re: Compression through normalization"
In reply to: Philippe Verdy: "RE: Normalisation stability, was: Compression through normalization"
Next in thread: Philippe Verdy: "RE: Normalisation stability, was: Compression through normalization"
Reply: Philippe Verdy: "RE: Normalisation stability, was: Compression through normalization"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

John Cowan suggested...

> We will never come close to exceeding this limit. Essentially all new
> combining characters are either class 0 or fall into one of the 200-range
> positional classes.

Or 9, for viramas.

One take-home point is that there won't be any more "fixed position"
classes added for Hebrew or any other scripts.

Rick

Next message: Peter Kirk: "Re: Normalisation stability, was: Compression through normalization"
Previous message: Mark Davis: "Re: Compression through normalization"
In reply to: Philippe Verdy: "RE: Normalisation stability, was: Compression through normalization"
Next in thread: Philippe Verdy: "RE: Normalisation stability, was: Compression through normalization"
Reply: Philippe Verdy: "RE: Normalisation stability, was: Compression through normalization"
Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Nov 25 2003 - 15:33:00 EST