Thanks all for the clarification and discussion. I am clear of the question now, though these characters complicate the decomposition a bit.
Best regards, Matt On Mon, May 20, 2013 at 10:57 PM, Christopher Fynn <[email protected]>wrote: > On 18/05/2013, Matt Ma <[email protected]> wrote: > > > Hi, > > > U+0F76 is a non-spacing combing mark (Mn) but its combing class value is > > defined as 0. Is this expected? The specialty of the character is that it > > is a composition of two combining marks, U+0FB2 and U+0F80. > > > Same question goes for U+0F73, U+0F75, U+0F77, U+0F78, and U+0F79. > > > Thanks and regards, > > Matt > > Notice. several of these characters are marked "use of this character > is discouraged" (they probably all should be) It is generally better > to use the (decomposed) component characters instead because that is > the way they should collate in a normal Tibetan dictionary. An > ordinary Tibetan user will also spell out words containing these > characters as if these are two or three seperate characters. >
