Bill Poser <billposer2 at gmail dot com> wrote: > 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.
But U+1E95 is the precomposed equivalent of z followed by U+0331. -- Doug Ewell | Thornton, Colorado, USA http://www.ewellic.org | @DougEwell
