Follow-up Comment #15, bug #67244 (group groff):
> a base glyph can do double duty as a combining glyph? If so, yikes! That
> doesn't happen in the Latin script!
I'm wrong. It does. Sometimes.
Ligatures and digraphs
Output Input Unicode Notes
──────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────────
ff \[ff] u0066_0066 ff ligature +
fi \[fi] u0066_0069 fi ligature +
fl \[fl] u0066_006C fl ligature +
ffi \[Fi] u0066_0066_0069 ffi ligature +
ffl \[Fl] u0066_0066_006C ffl ligature +
Æ \[AE] u00C6 AE ligature
æ \[ae] u00E6 ae ligature
Π\[OE] u0152 OE ligature
œ \[oe] u0153 oe ligature
IJ \[IJ] u0132 IJ digraph
ij \[ij] u0133 ij digraph
_______________________________________________________
Reply to this item at:
<https://savannah.gnu.org/bugs/?67244>
_______________________________________________
Message sent via Savannah
https://savannah.gnu.org/
signature.asc
Description: PGP signature
