At 01:30 +0200 2003-08-10, Philippe Verdy wrote:
Whateer you think, the SPACE+diacritic is still a hack, and certainly not a canonical equivalent (including for its properties), of the existing spacing diacritics, which also do not fit all usages because they are symbols.
It is the formally specified way to represent what you say you want to represent. If an implementation doesn't do that nicely enough, complain to the implementors. (This has already been suggested to you.)
As has already been clearly pointed out by Philippe, Kent and myself (and ignored by those opposed to any change), the combination SPACE + diacritic does not have the required categories, properties and specification for the function it is supposed to perform. Either these categories etc need to be adjusted (and I don't expect the general category of SPACE to be changed!), or some exceptional mechanism needs to be clearly defined, or, by far the simplest solution, a new base character can be defined which, when combined with the diacritic, has the required categories and properties.
-- Peter Kirk [EMAIL PROTECTED] (personal) [EMAIL PROTECTED] (work) http://www.qaya.org/
