On 03/11/2018 23:50, James Kass via Unicode wrote:
When the topic being discussed no longer matches the thread title, somebody should start a new thread with an appropriate thread title.
Yes, that is what also the OP called for, but my last reply though taking me some time to write was sent without checking the new mail, so unfortunately it didn’t acknowledge. So let’s start this new thread to account for Philippe Verdy’s proposal to encode a new format control. But all what I can add so far prior to probably stepping out of this discussion is that the industry does not seem to be interested in this initiative. Why do I think so? As already discussed on this List, even the long-existing FRACTION SLASH U+2044 has not been implemented by major vendors, except that HarfBuzz does implement it and makes its specified behavior available in environments using HarfBuzz, among which some major vendors’ products are actually available with HarfBuzz support. As a result, the Polish abbreviation of Magister as found on the postcard, and all other abbreviations using superscript that have been put into parallel in the parent thread, cannot be reliably encoded without using preformatted superscript, so far as the goal is a plain text backbone being in the benefit of reliable rendering support, rather than a semantic-centered coding that may be easier to parse by special applications but lacks wider industrial support. If nevertheless, <combining abbreviation mark> is encoded and will gain traction, or rather reversely: if it gains traction and will be encoded (I don’t know which way around to put it, given U+2044 has been encoded but one still cannot seem to be able to call it widely implemented), I would surely add it on keyboard layouts if I will still be maintaining any in that era. Best regards, Marcel