Thanks for reminding me; an note was to be added to that effect. I've added that to a new version, and sent it to the editorial committee for checking. Should be live early next week.
Mark (ᛗᚪᚱᚳ) ________ [EMAIL PROTECTED] IBM, MS 50-2/B11, 5600 Cottle Rd, SJ CA 95193 (408) 256-3148 fax: (408) 256-0799 ----- Original Message ----- From: "Doug Ewell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Unicode Mailing List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>; "Mark Davis" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Friday, March 28, 2003 17:31 Subject: Inherited-script characters > Last December, Mark Davis indicated that a passage similar to the > following would (or should) be added to UTR #24, "Script Names": > > > Whatever their script property values, characters with general > > categories of Mn and Me should also inherit their script from their > > base character. The nominal script property value for these characters > > may be different from INHERITED in cases where the best interpretation > > of that character in isolation would be a specific script. > > This meant that implementations would need to take the General Category, > not just the script name, into account when interpreting UTR #24 (now > proposed to be upgraded to a UAX). This is a reasonable change, but a > change nonetheless. I complained briefly about the extra overhead, then > got over it and added it to my "Scripts" program. > > In the proposed update to #24, I don't see anything about treating > characters with a General Category of "Mn" or "Me" differently. Was the > change scuttled, or just overlooked? > > -Doug Ewell > Fullerton, California > http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/ > > >
