Re: Unicode 3.1: IDS and ZW(N)J

• Next message: John Jenkins: "Re: Unicode 3.1: IDS and ZW(N)J"
• Previous message: Richard Cook: "Re: Radical Index online? (was Re: Chemistry on chinesse. (CJK))"
• Maybe in reply to: John Cowan: "Unicode 3.1: IDS and ZW(N)J"
• Next in thread: John Jenkins: "Re: Unicode 3.1: IDS and ZW(N)J"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
• Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

Mark Davis wrote:

> It doesn't add any value to insert joiners. Just add the IDS itself to the
> font table.

Certainly. But what if you want to display the content of Figure 10.8
(p. 270) in such a font? In that case, you can use ZWNJ to break up the
ligature. The first example could be written as <U+2FF1,
U+4E95,U+200C,U+86D9>, which cannot come out as a ligature.

Unfortunately, ZWNJ is not allowed in an IDS, so this will
produce the ill-formed IDS <U+2FF1,U+4E95>

Allowing ZWNJ/ZWJ in IDSes will allow the right rendering while
preserving well-formedness.

-- 
There is / one art             || John Cowan <jcowan@reutershealth.com>
no more / no less              || http://www.reutershealth.com
to do / all things             || http://www.ccil.org/~cowan
with art- / lessness           \\ -- Piet Hein

• Next message: John Jenkins: "Re: Unicode 3.1: IDS and ZW(N)J"
• Previous message: Richard Cook: "Re: Radical Index online? (was Re: Chemistry on chinesse. (CJK))"
• Maybe in reply to: John Cowan: "Unicode 3.1: IDS and ZW(N)J"
• Next in thread: John Jenkins: "Re: Unicode 3.1: IDS and ZW(N)J"
• Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ] [ subject ] [ author ] [ attachment ]
• Mail actions: [ respond to this message ] [ mail a new topic ]

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:18 EDT