On 2004.06.10, 18:45, Michael Everson <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> After a "double" diacritical, any further combining character could >> take as its base the "pair" of spacing characters "under" the said >> double diacritical, shouldn't it? > > I tried that in TextEdit, which is pretty smart, and the second > diacritic didn't centre over the pair, but rather over the 0251. But > I guess that's the only choice, and it would be a question of making > a precomposed glyph.
With six combining double characters (U+035D..U+0362) and a zillion regular combining characters (101 alone in the U+0330 block), of which a full dozen would be in realist need, we'd need at the very least 6×12=72 precomposed glyphs. Isn't the Standard explicit about the positioning of a regular diacritical after a double one? -- ____. António MARTINS-Tuválkin | ()| <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> |####| PT-1XXX-XXX LISBOA Não me invejo de quem tem | +351 934 821 700 carros, parelhas e montes | http://www.tuvalkin.web.pt/bandeira/ só me invejo de quem bebe | http://pagina.de/bandeiras/ a água em todas as fontes |
