From: Peter Kirk (peterkirk@qaya.org)
Date: Fri Jan 30 2004 - 15:02:00 EST
On 30/01/2004 09:44, Kenneth Whistler wrote:
> ...
>
>The reason for this is that these are *small capital* variants.
>Small capitals were never given compatibility decomposition mappings
>in UnicodeData.txt. Thus, because compatibility decomposition
>mappings are used for the first, automated cut at tertiary
>weighting distinctions, small capitals don't get autoweighted
>as tertiary variants. Instead, the input file is generated in
>such a way that they get primary weights right after the group
>of characters associated with the primary weight of the base
>character.
>
>...
>
>
Couldn't you just treat the small caps like the mathematical
alphanumeric symbols, as <font> compatibility variants of ordinary
capital letters - which is after all what they are? That would I suppose
make the distinction quaternary, at the code point level only, but I
doubt if that matters. And it would tidy up the collation charts.
-- Peter Kirk peter@qaya.org (personal) peterkirk@qaya.org (work) http://www.qaya.org/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Jan 30 2004 - 15:53:14 EST