Peter, I think we should not, under the circumstances, encode another
character for this. People shouldn't be writing software for "Hindi
support" that is too lame to be able to render such a thing just because
it's not "in the block". (They might not render it for other reasons, such
as "it's not in the font", but there are lots of things "outside of the
block" that could be used and useful in such a context.)
Rick
> The question is whether there is any problem using U+0294, and whether
> proposing a Devanagari-specific character would be a better option. One
> particular problem I can think would be likely to occur would be rendering
> engines such as Uniscribe or whatever is coded into host environments like
> Java for "Hindi" support would not be able to cope with U+0294 occuring in
> the midst of a Devanagari sequence. E.g. I could easily imagine something
> like Uniscribe failing to reorder U+093F before a glottal U+0294.
>
> Should we try to educate and convince implementers of the need to allow
> U+0294 to be reckoned as part of the Devanagari script, or should we
> propose a new Devanagari glottal character?
>
