On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 5:33 AM, Richard Wordingham < [email protected]> wrote:
> On Fri, 30 Mar 2018 18:15:13 -0500 > Nathan Willis <[email protected]> wrote: > > > If the rule was that only <Modern,Modern,Modern> would compose into > > something in the Syllables block, that would make total sense to me. > > But the comment makes it sound like <Old,Old,Modern> also maps to > > stuff in the Syllables block and that it's only the Old Ts that are > > excluded. That's what I don't understand. > > The comment is explaining which <LV,T> combinations compose at the > character level. I think you will find that LV combinations only exist > for <Modern,Modern> combinations. It is at that level that > <Old,Old,Modern> is excluded. > > Ah, okay; got it. I definitely was not considering how the L,V -> LV step affected things either. Makes sense now; thanks for the explanation! Nate > What you seem to be after is a change to the text on line 1154 from > > "Only the <L,V> sequences for the 11xx ranges combine." > > to > > "Only the <L,V> sequences for parts of the 11xx ranges combine." > > or > > "Only the <L,V> sequences for some L and some V combine." > > The interesting bit of Unicode history is why the consortium caved in > to Korean demands for the full set of <modern, modern, modern> to be > included. An uninteresting bit of HarfBuzz archaeology would be > whether someone briefly thought that the all L and V in the Hangul Jamo > block composed at the character level. > > Richard. > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > HarfBuzz mailing list > [email protected] > https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/harfbuzz > -- nathan.p.willis [email protected] <http://identi.ca/n8>
_______________________________________________ HarfBuzz mailing list [email protected] https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/harfbuzz
