On Sat, 26 Aug 2017 21:52:19 +0200 Philippe Verdy via Unicode <[email protected]> wrote:
> 2017-08-26 21:28 GMT+02:00 Richard Wordingham via Unicode < > [email protected]>: > Of course SHY in this use is not suitable, but who knows if one will > not need this to split in tow parts what would be otherwise a single > cluster (possibly reordered by canonical reordering if one needs to > split between two Indic matras: this would suggest there's a need for > a new "empty base consonnant" for that Indic script, but SHY (U+00AD) > should probably not have the correct effect if it also inserts an > undesired line break opportunity, independantly of how the glyph > which would be rendered and the position (first or second line) where > it would be rendered if the linebreak is honored). I am confused as to what conceivable case you have in mind. An example would help. I wonder if I'm misunderstanding what you mean by 'canonical reordering'. Do you mean the order of codepoints, or the arrangement of glyphs. CGJ is available to preserve a specific ordering of codepoints, though it is completely redundant in most Indic scripts. It is a fact that aksharas do get split between lines in manuscripts, undesirable though it may be. In a transcription intended to preserve a division into lines, one would probably use NBSP at such a point, and worry less about attempting to preserve the structure of the line-broken akshara. It seems that Unicode only supports word boundaries and their absence where they provide or prohibit line breaks. Richard.
