A sign/abbreviation for "magister"

[Philippe Verdy via Unicode]

Also if the "combining abbreviation mark" is used only at end of a
combining sequence to transform it, we can avoid all needs of CGJ for that
mark, if the mark is itself assigned the combining class 0.
So
- abbreviating "Mister" as "M<r>" (without the underscore below "r") becomes
  <M><r,COMBINING ABBREVIATION MARK>
- abbreviating "Monseigneur" as "M<gs>" (without the underscore below "g"
and "r") becomes
  <M><g,COMBINING ABBREVIATION MARK><s,COMBINING ABBREVIATION MARK>
- abbreviating "Ditto" as "D<to>" (without the underscore below "to")
becomes
  <D><t,COMBINING ABBREVIATION MARK><o,COMBINING ABBREVIATION MARK>
- abbreviating "Operation" as "Op<tn> (without the underscore below "to")
becomes
  <O><p><t,COMBINING ABBREVIATION MARK><n,COMBINING ABBREVIATION MARK>
- abbreviating "constitutionalité" as "C<té> (without the underscore below
"té") becomes
  <C><t,COMBINING ABBREVIATION MARK><é,COMBINING ABBREVIATION MARK> or
  <C><t,COMBINING ABBREVIATION MARK><e,COMBINING ACUTE><COMBINING
ABBREVIATION MARK>
- abbreviating "Numéro" as "N<o>" (without the underscore below "o") becomes
  <N><o,COMBINING UNDERLINE,COMBINING ABBREVIATION MARK>
- abbreviating "Magister" as "M<r>" (with the double underscore below "r")
becomes
  <M><r,COMBINING DOUBLE UNDERLINE,COMBINING ABBREVIATION MARK>

It is quite easy for text renderers to infer the selection of a small
superscript for the base (and its other combining characters or extenders
when they support these combinations), before applying the new combiner
mark. If not, they can still render the leading base (and its other
supported combining characters or extenders), followed by some dotted mark
(e.g. a small dotted circle).
Renderers that do not recognize the new combining abbreviation mark will
just render it at end of the sequence as a usual square or rectangular
"tofu"; those that recognize it as a combining character but no support for
it, will render the usual dotted square (meaning "unsupported combining
mark", to distinguish from the meaning as if there was a "missing base
character" to apply before a known combining mark or extender)


Le dim. 28 oct. 2018 à 18:54, Philippe Verdy <verdy_p at wanadoo.fr> a écrit :

> Le dim. 28 oct. 2018 à 18:28, Janusz S. Bień <jsbien at mimuw.edu.pl> a
> écrit :
>
>> On Sun, Oct 28 2018 at 15:19 +0100, Philippe Verdy via Unicode wrote:
>> > Given the "squiggle" below letters are actually gien distinctive
>> > semantics, I think it should be encoded a combining character (to be
>> > written not after a "superscript" but after any normal base letter,
>> > possibly with other combining characters, or CGJ if needed because of
>> > the compatibility equivalence.  That "squiggle" (which may look like
>> > an underscore) would haver the effect of implicity making the base
>> > letter superscript (smaller and elevated). It would have probably a
>> > "combining below" class.
>>
>> Seems to me an elegant solution.
>>
>> [...]
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 27 2018 at 19:52 GMT, James Kass via Unicode wrote:
>> > Mr͇ / M=ͬ
>>
>> For me only the latter seems acceptable. Using COMBINING LATIN SMALL
>> LETTER R is a natural idea, but I feel uneasy using just EQUALS SIGN as
>> the base character. However in the lack of a better solution I can live
>> with it :-)
>>
>
> There's a third alternative, that uses the superscript letter r, followed
> by the combining double underline, instead of the normal letter r followed
> by the same combining double underline.
> However it is still not very elegant if we stil need to use only the
> limited set of superscript letters (this still reduces the number of
> abbreviations, such as those commonly used in French that needs a
> superscript "é")
>
>
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://unicode.org/pipermail/unicode/attachments/20181028/b63362ae/attachment.html>