Re: implicit weight base for U+2CEA2

2017-09-27 Thread Markus Scherer via Unicode
On Wed, Sep 27, 2017 at 4:07 PM, James Tauber wrote: > Ah yes, I was just going by membership in the CJK Unified Ideographs > Extension E block, not actual assignment. > > So the lack of assignment means it should fail the Unified_Ideograph > membership in

Re: implicit weight base for U+2CEA2

2017-09-27 Thread James Tauber via Unicode
re Python implementation of the Unicode >> Collation Algorithm to work with 8.0.0, 9.0.0, and 10.0.0 but to get all >> the tests to work, I had to special case the implicit weight base for >> U+2CEA2. The spec seems to suggest the base should be FB80 but I had to >> ove

Re: implicit weight base for U+2CEA2

2017-09-27 Thread Ken Whistler via Unicode
k with 8.0.0, 9.0.0, and 10.0.0 but to get all the tests to work, I had to special case the implicit weight base for U+2CEA2. The spec seems to suggest the base should be FB80 but I had to override just that code point to have a base of FBC0 for the tests to pass. Is this a

Re: implicit weight base for U+2CEA2

2017-09-27 Thread Markus Scherer via Unicode
se the implicit weight base for > U+2CEA2. The spec seems to suggest the base should be FB80 but I had to > override just that code point to have a base of FBC0 for the tests to pass. > > Is this a known issue with the spec or something I've missed? > 2CEA2..2CEAF are unassigned code

implicit weight base for U+2CEA2

2017-09-27 Thread James Tauber via Unicode
I recently updated pyuca[1], my pure Python implementation of the Unicode Collation Algorithm to work with 8.0.0, 9.0.0, and 10.0.0 but to get all the tests to work, I had to special case the implicit weight base for U+2CEA2. The spec seems to suggest the base should be FB80 but I had to override