From: Asmus Freytag (asmusf@ix.netcom.com)
Date: Sat Aug 15 2009 - 10:31:05 CDT
On 8/14/2009 9:45 AM, Michael Everson wrote:
>
> They're not decomposable nor meant to be.
>
>
For decomposition to make sense a character needs to be either
equivalent to or in some ways a variant of its decomposition.
A more helpful answer to Andrew's would have provided some detail, for
example it might have provided an explanation why the AA ligature is
unrelated to the sequence <A, A>. As it is, the naive expectation would
be that the new AA characters is perhaps used for a long A sound or to
transcribe some manuscript usage, leaving the suspicion that <A, A>
might be a valid fallback. Since the question has been raised,
explaining the reasoning for at least one of the examples will put it to
rest more assuredly than stating, in effect, "things are the way they
are", which is a rather unhelpful approach.
A./
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Aug 15 2009 - 10:33:59 CDT