RE: Case mapping of dotless lowercase letters

From: Philippe Verdy (verdy_p@wanadoo.fr)
Date: Wed Dec 17 2003 - 18:00:22 EST

  • Next message: Kenneth Whistler: "American English translation of character names (was Re: Stability of WG2)"

    Chris Jacobs writes:
    > > >To display a dot, one can use one of the four canonical eqquivalents:
    > > > <LATIN CAPITAL LETTER I WITH DOT ABOVE, COMBINING CIRCUMFLEX>
    > > > <LATIN CAPITAL LETTER I WITH CIRCUMFLEX, COMBINING DOT ABOVE>
    > > > <LATIN CAPITAL LETTER I, COMBINING DOT ABOVE, COMBINING CIRCUMFLEX>
    > > > <LATIN CAPITAL LETTER I, COMBINING CIRCUMFLEX, COMBINING DOT ABOVE>
    > > >(one is the NFC form, another is the NFD form, two others are also
    > > >possible)
    >
    > Those four are not all canonical equivalent since circumflex and dot above
    > are both combining class 230, so they interact.

    This allows me to make a small digression here for the presentation form of
    a dot below the circumflex: Should it really be below it or in the middle of
    the circumflex?

    If there's no difference, then what is the difference with the "combining
    Latin candrabindu" (used to transliterate Indic scripts to Latin), and a
    "combining breve" below a "combining dot above", which also interact at the
    same position?
    Look then at the case where the Latin candrabindu is applied above a
    lowercase soft-dotted i or j...

    If the separate circumflex should not freely enclose the separate dot (the
    difference applies), then it will need a new codification for the case where
    they interact more intimately, or to use CGJ between them to create a
    ligature of combining marks having the same combining class???

    Ohhh... I admit this is hypothetic for a possible use, but the candrabindu
    case is a precedent coming from romanization of non-Latin scripts: what if
    there's a combining x above used to interact over a diacritic and mark its
    suppression in corrected texts or in documents related to
    orthographic/grammatical rules, or simply because it is needed for correct
    romanization of some ancient script...

    __________________________________________________________________
    << ella for Spam Control >> has removed Spam messages and set aside
    Newsletters for me
    You can use it too - and it's FREE! http://www.ellaforspam.com





    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Dec 17 2003 - 18:41:13 EST