From: Peter_Constable@sil.org
Date: Fri May 09 2003 - 12:18:09 EDT
> (2) What's the normative (if there's such a thing) rendering behavior
> of a sequence with U+2062-like characters?
There isn't any normative behaviour, but the default assumption is that
INVISIBLE TIMES is normally invisible. There is a reason why 2061..2063 are
called *invisible* operators. Note, for instance the explicit comment for
2063: "...when no visible comma is used between multiple indices".
Of course, for *any* invisible character including controls, there are
contexts in which it is appropriate to display some visible representation
of it. But normally, they are meant to be invisible.
- Peter
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Constable
Non-Roman Script Initiative, SIL International
7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd., Dallas, TX 75236, USA
Tel: +1 972 708 7485
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri May 09 2003 - 13:20:37 EDT