On Sun, 23 Feb 2014 23:13:53 +0100 Philippe Verdy <[email protected]> wrote:
> 2014-02-23 22:32 GMT+01:00 Richard Wordingham < > [email protected]>: > > > On Sun, 23 Feb 2014 20:49:24 +0100 > > Philippe Verdy <[email protected]> wrote:*At least, referring to > > Version 24 of the LFML specification, I assume > > Part 5 Section 3.5, which defines "&..<<", also applies to Section > > 3.9, which purports to define the meaning of "&[before 2]..<<". > > It's conceivable that I am wrong, and the meaning of "&[before 2]á > > << ạ" is undefined. > This looks like a cryptic notation anyway. If we assume that there's > an implicit reset at start of a collation rule, and that collation > does not define any relative order for the empty string, you could > simply write this reset at level 2 as: > << á << ạ > instead of the mysterious notation (and in fact verbose and probably > inconsistant in the way the same level 2 is further used with "<<"): > &[before 2]á << ạ My understanding of the meaning of the notation is that: 1) ạ is to have the same number and type of collation elements as á currently has; 2) The last collation element of ạ that has a positive weight at level 2 is to be immediately before the corresponding collation element of á at the secondary level; 3) No collation element is to be ordered between these two collation elements; and 4) Their other collation elements are to be the same. Thus, before the operation we have a̓ << á << à << ạ. After it, we have a̓ << ạ << á << à. Is this really what your notation "<< á << ạ" is intended to mean? If we are looking for a brief notation, I think "&á >> ạ" would be better. Richard. _______________________________________________ Unicode mailing list [email protected] http://unicode.org/mailman/listinfo/unicode
