On Wed, 5 Jun 2002, Abi Lover wrote:
In my previous message I had not said anything about U+06C0 or
normalisation. It had nothing to do with that. I dont know where you got
that idea from. Perhaps you should go back and read it again, and come up
with a more sensible reply.
You did
From: Roozbeh Pournader [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2002 14:22:19 +0430 (IRST)
You did not say anything about Normalization. That's more than correct.
But the only reason for not allowing U+06C0 in the standard, is its
cannonical decomposition. That weighs down all other reasoning. BTW,
