From: "Peter Kirk" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > I note that there is no line break opportunity in <space, NBSP>. But is > there one after the space in <space, RLM, NBSP>? If so, <RLM, NBSP, > combining character> has a third advantage, that it gives the right line > break opportunity when this sequence is word initial, which it wouldn't > do without the RLM.
How can we be so complicated when a new base character with the needed properties would be much simpler and easier to support in implementations? What is wrong with the encoding of new recommanded alternatives to SPACE or NBSP, i.e. an invisible symbol, an invisible LTR letter, an invisible RTL letter? This way we can fix some issues in the current text of UAX'es but recommand that new writers use a new base character which will behave correctly without those too complex hacks that users and implementers won't understand.
