Re: Are Named sequences always going to be graphemes?

On 21 Jun 2012, at 04:09, Shriramana Sharma wrote:

> On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 7:13 AM, Ken Whistler <kenw_at_sybase.com> wrote:
>> I don't see any necessary correlation between what sequences
>> people might end up insisting on naming (for whatever reason) and what
>> people might consider to be "graphemes".
>
> I submit that the following sequence shall be allotted named sequence status:
>
> \u0053\u0048\u0052\u0049\u0052\u0041\u004D\u0041\u004E\u0041

I don't know. Someone will be along looking for a title-cased form.

Michael Everson * http://www.evertype.com/
Received on Thu Jun 21 2012 - 03:04:44 CDT