Philippe Verdy scripsit: > I would have prefered to see sharp-s replaced first by long-s + s, and then > only by s + s if long-s is not available; after all the compatibility > equivalent of long-s is the common s.
The effect of setting the compatibility decomposition to long-s + s would have been the same, since decompositions are applied recursively. An application that knows what it is doing can map sharp-s to long-s + s; as a practical matter, however, sharp-s is far more available than long-s, since the former is in current use an the latter is not. -- "We are lost, lost. No name, no business, no Precious, nothing. Only empty. Only hungry: yes, we are hungry. A few little fishes, nassty bony little fishes, for a poor creature, and they say death. So wise they are; so just, so very just." --Gollum [EMAIL PROTECTED] www.ccil.org/~cowan
