Invisible letter (was Re: a character for an unknown character)
Janusz S. Bien
jsbien at mimuw.edu.pl
Wed Dec 21 11:15:19 CST 2016
Quote/Cytat - David Corbett <corbett.dav at husky.neu.edu> (Wed 21 Dec
2016 05:56:27 PM CET):
> Couldn’t you use U+1D52 MODIFIER LETTER SMALL O?
In our corpus COMBINING LATIN SMALL LETTER O sometimes occurs in its
combining function, it seemed more elegant to use a uniform encoding.
But you are right, in the example quoted MODIFIER LETTER SMALL O could
be also used.
> (I changed the subject line because the invisible letter proposal is not
> relevant to the question about a lacuna character.)
>> I strongly support this. In our historical corpus of Polish
>> we have in particular words ending with 'COMBINING LATIN SMALL LETTER
>> O' (U+0366).
>> We had to precede the character with NBSP as the vase, but to preserve
>> the correct segmentation into words we had to treat NBSP as a letter.
Prof. dr hab. Janusz S. Bień - Uniwersytet Warszawski (Katedra
Prof. Janusz S. Bień - University of Warsaw (Formal Linguistics Department)
jsbien at uw.edu.pl, jsbien at mimuw.edu.pl, http://fleksem.klf.uw.edu.pl/~jsbien/
More information about the Unicode