Cart
[Home] [By Thread] [By Date] [Recent Entries]
Steve Dahl wrote: > My guess is that 0xB7 and 0x387 were included either by accident, or else in Unicode 1.0, they > were incorrectly classified as Lm characters. I can't find my old Unicode 1.0 chart, so I > don't know. > > My guess is that Extender character means a character classified as Lm. As far as I can tell, > these are characters that make no sense unless they follow another letter. Think of them as > being equivalent to diacritical marks, except that they take up space next to the modified > character, whereas normal diacritical marks fit in the same visual character cell as the > character they modify. The Lm character must always be displayed next to its preceding > character, and it's illegal to break the line between an Lm character and its preceding > character. The trouble is that there are lots of other Lm characters besides those classified as extenders. For example: > > 02B2;MODIFIER LETTER SMALL J;Lm;0;L;<super> 006A;;;;N;;;;; > 02B3;MODIFIER LETTER SMALL R;Lm;0;L;<super> 0072;;;;N;;;;; Why aren't those also considered to be extenders? There seems to be some history and motivation here that needs explaining. Paul xml-dev: A list for W3C XML Developers. To post, mailto:xml-dev@i... Archived as: http://www.lists.ic.ac.uk/hypermail/xml-dev/ and on CD-ROM/ISBN 981-02-3594-1 To (un)subscribe, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; (un)subscribe xml-dev To subscribe to the digests, mailto:majordomo@i... the following message; subscribe xml-dev-digest List coordinator, Henry Rzepa (mailto:rzepa@i...)
|
