Hello Werner, > > So I imagine that noone will object if troff combines > > > > x\[u0302]\[u0301] > > into > > \[u0078_0302_0301] > > I think this is OK. Currently, there is a single non-spacing glyph > used in groff (`slashnot' in devdvi; the other non-spacing glyphs from > the various DVI fonts have no names), and this has to be placed before > the base character. Additionally, it isn't a valid Unicode character > so there is no conflict.
Does the separator need to be a glyph? I haven't looked yet how exactly \& works, but for most devices I expect it to be an input node, but not a glyph. > I've thought that you suggest to handle > > <U+0078><U+0302><U+0301> -> \[x u0302 u0301] > > in preconv, and > > x\[u0302]\[u0301] -> \[x u0302 u0301] > > within groff. Actually I want to do one _or_ the other. If it's done inside troff, there is no need to do it in preconv as well. > The latter is quite > complicated -- the node merging code in GNU troff is, well, not easy > to understand -- I'll try to put it there nevertheless, because composed characters in Unicode are a concept similar to ligatures; I would like to avoid implementing two similar things in two very different ways. Bruno _______________________________________________ Groff mailing list Groff@gnu.org http://lists.gnu.org/mailman/listinfo/groff
