On Thu, 17 May 2018 00:34:35 +0100 Michael Everson via Unicode <[email protected]> wrote:
> This is not a fault of the encoding. > > > On 16 May 2018, at 23:01, Richard Wordingham via Unicode > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > I think simple Windows keyboards have a limit of 4 16-bit code > > units; for an Indic SMP script, one couldn't map <x> to a single > > key, as it would require 6 code units. It is a consequence of the policy of avoiding precomposed characters. If there were a precomposed character for <x>, the keyboard could emit that character - job done. One objection is that one would need a sequence of decompositions: <XA> = <KA_PLUS, SSA> <KA_PLUS> = <KA, VIRAMA> Some people are vehemently opposed to unnatural characters like <KA_PLUS>. Presumable the official view is that Windows Text Services have taken us beyond that point, and the likes of <XA> above are not needed. If X persists, perhaps named sequences should be assigned numbers so that X can make a generic allocation of keysym codes to named sequences. Richard.
