; combining marks. I would still consider splitting to be a needless
> complication here, and instead encode begin/end pairs of combining
> parentheses instead of what is in N4106.
No, the usual and general way of handling this is, if the uni-width of
parenthesis is not desirable for esthetic re
t-goes-on-both-sides of something that may have different
widths in different instances. Of course you also need width info for
combining marks. I would still consider splitting to be a needless
complication here, and instead encode begin/end pairs of combining
parentheses instead of what is in N410
From: Kent Karlsson
Den 2011-11-05 04:23, skrev "António Martins-Tuválkin" :
> > I'm going through N4106 ( http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/n4106.pdf ),
> ...
>
> I see the following characters being put forward for proposing to be
> encoded:
>
>
ombining mark solution would become more
desirable.
Szabolcs
--
Szelp, André Szabolcs
+43 (650) 79 22 400
On Sun, Nov 6, 2011 at 22:46, Kent Karlsson wrote:
>
> Den 2011-11-05 04:23, skrev "António Martins-Tuválkin" :
>
>> I'm going through N4106 ( http://s
Den 2011-11-05 04:23, skrev "António Martins-Tuválkin" :
> I'm going through N4106 ( http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/n4106.pdf ),
...
I see the following characters being put forward for proposing to be
encoded:
1ABB COMBINING PARENTHESES ABOVE
1ABC COMBINING DOUBLE
My biggest issue with N4106 is that COMBINING LIGHT CENTRALIZATION STROKE BELOW
and COMBINING STRONG CENTRALIZATION STROKE BELOW are given combining class 220
(below). The only reason this was done was so they could be used with the
proposed COMBINING PARENTHESIS BELOW—that's it. N4106
2011/11/5 António Martins-Tuválkin :
> I'm going through N4106
> ( http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/n4106.pdf ), and enjoying very
> much, as usual. Some questions:
> * “Interesting” design at U+AB4C LATIN SMALL LETTER SCRIPT R WITH RING
> — maybe a "see also
I'm going through N4106
( http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/n4106.pdf ), and enjoying very
much, as usual. Some questions:
* There’s U+AB3D LATIN SMALL LETTER BLACKLETTER O, not unified with
U+1D52C MATHEMATICAL FRAKTUR SMALL O, I see, as this is restricted to
math use? (Ditto, m.m.,
8 matches
Mail list logo