Peter Kirk <peterkirk at qaya dot org> wrote: > I hope that anyone who is reviewing the INVISIBLE LETTER proposal is > aware that this kind of usage with ZWNJ (in fact I think you probably > mean ZWJ) is not at all part of the proposal, but is nothing more than > a speculative extenstion of it dreamed up by Philippe. And it is one > which has many potential problems.
However, it may be indicative of the sort of confusion that INVISIBLE LETTER may cause. That is to say, the benefits of creating a separate character to disunify the diacritic-carrying function from SPACE are certainly real, but so is the likelihood that people will confuse its functionality with that of ZWSP and ZWJ and ZWNJ and ZWNBSP, and invent bizarre combinations thereof. -Doug Ewell Fullerton, California http://users.adelphia.net/~dewell/
