Quote/Cytat - Michael Everson <ever...@evertype.com> (Wed 21 Dec 2016
05:25:30 PM CET):
I still believe that we need INVISIBLE LETTER
http://unicode.org/review/pr-41-invisible.pdf
I think that for the display of combining characters without a base
character that the recommended NBSP makes no sense. NBSP is supposed
to glue the characters on either side of it to itself. It makes
sense that the following character, say COMBINING ACUTE ACCENT,
would be glued to it. But why should the two of those be glued to
whatever precedes?
I strongly support this. In our historical corpus of Polish
http://korpusy.klf.uw.edu.pl/en/IMPACT_GT_2/
we have in particular words ending with 'COMBINING LATIN SMALL LETTER
O' (U+0366).
We had to precede the character with NBSP as the vase, but to preserve
the correct segmentation into words we had to treat NBSP as a letter.
Best regards
Janusz
--
Prof. dr hab. Janusz S. Bień - Uniwersytet Warszawski (Katedra
Lingwistyki Formalnej)
Prof. Janusz S. Bień - University of Warsaw (Formal Linguistics Department)
jsb...@uw.edu.pl, jsb...@mimuw.edu.pl, http://fleksem.klf.uw.edu.pl/~jsbien/
