- From: Martin J Duerst <mduerst@ifi.unizh.ch>
- Date: Thu, 24 Oct 1996 20:33:38 +0100 (MET)
- To: keld@dkuug.dk (Keld J|rn Simonsen)
- Cc: rosenne@NetVision.net.il, www-international@w3.org
Keld Simonsen wrote: >Martin J Duerst writes: > >> So while I agree that bad display can be inconvenient (but in >> some cases, if it's the only way given limited resources, it >> might be considered better than nothing) or even offensive, >> this has nothing to do with the decision whether to internally >> store things precomposed or decomposed. >But we are not talking about coding of one character, but decomposing >an entity into two or more characters. This means that the entity >for example the =D8 letter can be decomposed into two logical entities, >and that is not the case for =D8, which is a separate letter.=20 >You cannot split =D8 into any components. Well, this may again be in the eye of the beholder, but for your relief, I can tell you that there is actually no decomposition equivalence specified for =D8 (for those, like me, who have problems viewing this, it is an O with a / across it). >Anyway there is not in 10646 any definition on how to split >=D8 into smaller components. Nor is there, as said above, any such definition in Unicode. But there is one for A-grave and similar things. Regards, Martin.
Received on Thursday, 24 October 1996 14:34:08 UTC