absolutely ------------------------------ Mark <https://plus.google.com/114199149796022210033> * * *— Il meglio è l’inimico del bene —* **
On Thu, May 17, 2012 at 6:07 PM, Peter Constable <[email protected]>wrote: > Whatever Emacs or other implementations use, I'd consider 00D7 a better > choice than 0078 for a generic base placeholder on which to display > non-Latin (or any) combining marks. > > > Peter > > -----Original Message----- > From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On > Behalf Of Richard Wordingham > Sent: Thursday, May 17, 2012 1:00 PM > To: [email protected] > Cc: [email protected] > Subject: Re: Mark-Driven Script Categorisation > > On Thu, 17 May 2012 20:41:19 +0200 > Philippe Verdy <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Is it really the Latin letter x in question there, if it's use is to > > be a visible placeholder to hold diacritic vowel marks ? The Latin > > letter has the problem of is dual case (not found in the Lao script, > > and a too large variation across many font styles, when the > > multiplication sign × would probably fit better for its use as a > > placeholder. > > You're the only other person I've met who thinks that it is > U+00D7 MULTIPLICATION SIGN, but the evidence is against us. Emacs, > Ununtu and Windows all reckon that the Lao keyboard has 'x'. > > Richard. > > > > > > > > > >
