From mboxrd@z Thu Jan  1 00:00:00 1970
Message-ID: <c902098fa1d347c189c2c5a334b4106a@quanstro.net>
Date: Fri, 19 May 2006 17:35:10 -0500
From: quanstro@quanstro.net
To: 9fans@cse.psu.edu
Subject: Re: [9fans] combining characters
In-Reply-To: <20060519223444.GI14223@submarine>
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset="UTF-8"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Topicbox-Message-UUID: 52e505fc-ead1-11e9-9d60-3106f5b1d025

i should have said "glyph."

the thing you're missing is that there is no precombined form
of {X+combining double breve} for any roman letter X that i know of.
this means that most utf renderers will give you either "X=EF=BF=BD" or =EF=
=BF=BD.

not having a precombined form is a pain.

- erik

On Fri May 19 17:35:43 CDT 2006, rvs@sun.com wrote:
> >=20
> > CA: Corporate Author
> >     Nizhegorodskai?a? gosudarstvennai?a?
> >     sel?skokhozi?a?i?stvennai?a? akademii?a?
> >=20
> > the character that probablly doesn't look right is a combining double=
 breve.
>=20
>   What ?!?! How come this character ended up being a compound one ? The=
 fact
>   that it looks like one when rendered doesn't deprive it from being un=
ique.
>=20
>   Or am I missing something here ?
>=20
> Thanks,
> Roman.