No, I was contrasting the behaviour of s followed by U+0332, for which there is no precomposed letter, with U+1E95, which is the precomposed equivalent of z followed by U+0332.
On Tue, Oct 9, 2012 at 10:13 AM, Andreas Prilop <[email protected]>wrote: > On Sat, 6 Oct 2012, Bill Poser wrote: > > > Characters with a combining low line encoded as a single Unicode > > codepoint are rendered correctly. Thus 's' followed by U+0332 > > is rendered as 's' followed by a low line, but U+1E95 > > LATIN SMALL LETTER Z WITH LINE BELOW is correctly rendered > > with the underscore beneath the 'z'. > > You seem to confuse U+0331 and U+0332. > There is no precomposed letter with U+0332. > There are several precomposed letters with U+0331, see > http://www.user.uni-hannover.de/nhtcapri/combining-marks.html > > -- > Outgoing mail is certified free from defamation of Islam™ > and insult of the Prophet™. > Checked by Thinkpol anti-obscenity system v. 6.66. > >
