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_
