Re: Unicode "no-op" Character?

From: Richard Wordingham via Unicode <unicode_at_unicode.org>
Date: Thu, 4 Jul 2019 00:20:24 +0100

On Wed, 3 Jul 2019 17:51:29 -0400
"Mark E. Shoulson via Unicode" <unicode_at_unicode.org> wrote:

> I think the idea being considered at the outset was not so complex as
> these (and indeed, the point of the character was to avoid making
> these kinds of decisions).

Shawn Steele appeared to be claiming that there was no good, interesting
reason for separating base character and combining mark. I was
refuting that notion. Natural text boundaries can get very messy -
some languages have word boundaries that can be *within* an
indecomposable combining mark.

Richard.
Received on Wed Jul 03 2019 - 18:20:54 CDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Wed Jul 03 2019 - 18:20:54 CDT