John Hudson wrote on 06/25/2003 06:47:44 PM: > >This is not. The Unicode Standard makes no assumptions or claims > >about what the phonological or meaning equivalence of <hiriq, patah> > >or <patah, hiriq> is for Biblical Hebrew. > > But it does make assumptions about the canonical equivalence of the mark
> orders <U+05B4, U+05B7> and <U+05B7, U+05B4>, unless my understanding of > the purpose of combining classes is completely mistaken. Your understanding on this point is correct. > My understanding > is that any ordering of two marks with different combining classes is > canonically equivalent; Yes. > further, I understand that some normalisation forms > will re-order marks to move marks with lower combining class values closer > to the base character. *Every* Unicode normalization form will apply canonical reordering. > * Meteg re-ordering is in some respects even more problematic than > multi-vowel re-ordering And it is because of meteg-vowel ordering distinctions that the ordering of things like patah + hiriq should not be solved in any way other than the two having the same canonical combining class, because that is exactly what will be needed to deal with meteg-vowel ordering distinctions. - Peter --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter Constable Non-Roman Script Initiative, SIL International 7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd., Dallas, TX 75236, USA Tel: +1 972 708 7485
