Peter Constable <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> I inquired about that recently on the unicoRe list, and was told that
> the semantics of ZWJ/ZWNJ will be extended in 3.0.1 (or maybe it was
> 3.1).
Well, that's a good thing. It sounds like the benefits described by
Everson will be made available in Unicode after all.
> You mentioned that this decision was made at the meeting in February.
> Interestingly, I was at that meeting, and my recollection was that
> extending the semantics of ZWJ/ZWNJ was going to be given further
> consideration, after some people investigated the implications of
> extending the semantics of ZWJ, particularly for Indic scripts. But I
> left before the meeting was over, and the minutes reflect that a
> decision was in fact made (although the weasle word "provisionally"
> is used).
Thanks for the insight on this process. Somehow I needed more
information than the word "rejected" in the Pipeline table could
offer. \u263a
-Doug Ewell
Fullerton, California
