Peter Constable wrote,
> Don't forget canonical equivalence (I forgot about this as well): the > double-width diacritics have a combining class of 234 rather than 230. > This means that 0251 0361 0302 028A is canonically equivalent to 0251 > 0302 0361 028A. Therefore, the first (for better or worse) should appear > just the way Doulos SIL renders it. and later wrote, > > That rule applies to combining marks in the *same* canonical combining > class. In this case, they are in different classes. Sure enough! Thanks. I didn't even think to check the combining class, both were marks above. Doesn't this mean that it isn't possible to stack a combining circumflex above a combining spanning inverted breve? Does this mean we'd need double-wide clones of all the combining marks in order to support such combos? (Well, at least I can give up on trying to make it display right here.) Best regards, James Kass
