Rick McGowan wrote: > Why not just encode two new double combining marks to go along with the > already known double diacritics at U+0360, U+0361, U+0362 [...] These are just > two more examples of something we already have; and there are not likely > to be thousands of them, perhaps only a few more.
Famous last words. It wouldn't surprise me if every non- script-specific combining mark of the "above" and "below" canonical combining classes ended up being valid associated with two letters. Do you want double-diacritic clones for all 65 or so? "You cut your throat like with butter-knife, slow and outscruciating." --Nicholas van Rijn -- John Cowan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> http://www.reutershealth.com I amar prestar aen, han mathon ne nen, http://www.ccil.org/~cowan han mathon ne chae, a han noston ne 'wilith. --Galadriel, _LOTR:FOTR_