*Please* use a different email subject line for the "x vs. Lao" discussion. markus
On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 1:57 AM, <vanis...@boil.afraid.org> wrote: > Well, I was speaking of the general case, not this specific example. > Orthographies which mix in random characters from other scripts do not, and > should not, drive the identity of characters for scripts, per se. If you > need > to indicate a random character from another script used in a particular > orthography, Script Extensions is the mechanism that should probably be > used, > rather than assigning a character that firmly belongs in one script to > script=common. > > Is that better, Mark?
