Re: Questions about diacritics

From: Peter Kirk (peterkirk@qaya.org)
Date: Wed Sep 15 2004 - 04:14:59 CDT

  • Next message: Peter Kirk: "Re: Questions about diacritics"

    On 15/09/2004 04:02, Peter Constable wrote:

    > ...
    >
    >IIRC, the scenario of IL *not* followed by a combining mark was not one
    >explicitly discussed by the proposers before preparing their proposal. I
    >would consider it a possibility that the advance width could be in
    >proportion to the width of the combining mark; it might be considered a
    >logical extension of that idea to say that the advance width could
    >reduce to 0 in the event the maximum width of marks combining with the
    >IL were 0 (i.e. there are no visible combining marks), but that was not
    >a specific intent of the proposal.
    >
    >
    >
    The particular case when a reduction to zero width would be especially
    appropriate is when INVISIBLE LETTER is used with a *spacing* combining
    mark, so that this can be displayed in isolation, with no leading space
    i.e. correctly aligned with a margin or column. This is particularly
    necessary in tables of alphabets etc, in which all of the characters in
    a writing system, including those which Unicode has defined as spacing
    combining marks, are displayed in a table. (Yes, correct display of
    tables is outside the scope of plain text, but it is not the job of
    markup to delete extra space which has been generated by Unicode.)

    -- 
    Peter Kirk
    peter@qaya.org (personal)
    peterkirk@qaya.org (work)
    http://www.qaya.org/
    


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Sep 15 2004 - 10:57:21 CDT