On Sun, 2 Feb 2020 16:20:07 -0800 Eric Muller via Unicode <unicode@unicode.org> wrote:
> That would imply some coordination among variations sequences on > different code points, right? > > E.g. <0B48> ≡ <0B47, 0B56>, so a variation sequence on 0B56 (Mn, > ccc=0) would imply the existence of a variation sequence on 0B48 with > the same variation selector, and the same effect. That particular case oughtn't to be impossible, as in NFD everything in sight has ccc=0. However TUS 12.0 Section 23.4 does contain an additional prohibition against meaningfully applying a variation selector to a 'canonical decomposable character'. (Scare quotes because 'ly' seems to be missing from the phrase.) Richard. > On 2/2/2020 11:43 AM, Mark Davis ☕️ via Unicode wrote: > I don't think there is a technical reason for disallowing variation > selectors after any starters (ccc=000); the normalization algorithm > doesn't care about the general category of characters. > > Mark