See the reference glyph for U+FB4B. One form looks like this with the dot above further to the left, the other like it with the dot a little further to the right. This glyph with the centred dot is a compromise between the two.
When you say "it", which glyph do you mean? I would like a description
of what the two glyphs look like and how they are to be distinguished,
please.
I think that someday is today! Some Hebrew vowel marks are attached to the consonant which logically follows. This applies in several cases in Hebrew orthography, holam above the right of holam and alef, holam sometimes merging with a following shin dot, and furtive patah which is encoded following the base character (always word final) but pronounced before it.
the marks follow the base character.
This is a universal Unicode rule, and may get us into trouble someday when we run into a script that attaches vowel marks to the following consonant. (Still worse, if it does so in some uses but not others: "A Elbereth Gilthoniel" won't be very processable if it must be encoded "A Lebrethe Glithnoile".)
One way round the problem, in this specific case and more generally, is to treat the vowel marks as combined with the preceding base character even if graphically they are displaced on to the following character. (At least, in Hebrew they don't modify the shape of the following character.)
-- Peter Kirk [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://web.onetel.net.uk/~peterkirk/
