>>>>> "Philippe" == Philippe Verdy <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
Philippe> But if one wants to restore the preious visual behavior, Philippe> even if it's incorrect for languages using this digraph as a Philippe> letter, what would be the behavior of using the following Philippe> sequence: <ij, combining dot above, combining accute> Philippe> (i.e. should this display 1 or 2 dots?) Seems clear to me that if ij has soft dots (and I agree it should) then to get a pair of dots via a combining accent one should use a two dot combining accent: U+0308 COMBINING DIAERESIS. So if you want two dots and an acute use ‹ij, U+0308, U+0301›: ij̈́ Of course a given font’s diaeresis will often not line up with the stems of its ij, and a custom one should be used instead. Or features and/or ligs as appropriate to the font’ technology could just use the ‹ij› glyph w/ an extra acute. Either way it is a glyph issue rather than a character issue. But it really seems to be just an academic issue, yes? -JimC
