It suggests that for many fonts,
U+0067 LATIN SMALL LETTER G + U+0327 COMBINING CEDILLA
and
U+0067 LATIN SMALL LETTER G + U+0312 COMBINING TURNED COMMA ABOVE
would have exactly the same rendering. Some applications would need to know this and treat U+0067 U+0327 the same as U+0067 U+0312 as equivalent.
I have seen _g_ with cedilla rendered with a rotated cedilla sticking out of its head. Very ugly!
But regardless, there is no obligation that a turned comma over _g_ produced by a following cedilla must be graphically identical to a turned comma produced by a following combining comma below.
I wonder if there's call for some sort of table of Unicode sequences
that aren't canonically equivalent but render the same.
It seems to me that Cedilla/undercomma folding would be a useful addition to "Charater Foldings" at http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr30.
Jim Allan
