From: Clive D.W. Feather (clive@demon.net)
Date: Tue May 28 2002 - 04:54:00 CDT
Charles Lindsey said:
>> (1) There is no easy way to determine what is and isn't a variation
>> selector (they are all category Mn and combining class 0, but so are other
>> characters). Thus we would have to enumerate them.
> Well you can look in the PropList, where you will see that all of them
> have the property "Other_Default_Ignorable_Code_Point".
Yes, but that's a bit of a hack - ODICP is basically a way of building the
Default_Ignorable_Code_Point property.
> So my present inclination is to leave things exactly as they are, except
> to refer to Unicode 3.2 in place of 3.1 as the minimum level addressed by
> our draft.
I agree that we can ignore these selectors. However, see my other email
concerning changes to 5.5 to remove combining classes.
-- Clive D.W. Feather | Work: <clive@demon.net> | Tel: +44 20 8371 1138 Internet Expert | Home: <clive@davros.org> | Fax: +44 870 051 9937 Demon Internet | WWW: http://www.davros.org | Mobile: +44 7973 377646 Thus plc | | NOTE: fax number change