A last missing link for interoperable representation
Hans Åberg via Unicode
unicode at unicode.org
Tue Jan 15 03:30:34 CST 2019
> On 15 Jan 2019, at 02:18, Richard Wordingham via Unicode <unicode at unicode.org> wrote:
> On Mon, 14 Jan 2019 16:02:05 -0800
> Asmus Freytag via Unicode <unicode at unicode.org> wrote:
>> On 1/14/2019 3:37 PM, Richard Wordingham via Unicode wrote:
>> On Tue, 15 Jan 2019 00:02:49 +0100
>> Hans Åberg via Unicode <unicode at unicode.org> wrote:
>> On 14 Jan 2019, at 23:43, James Kass via Unicode
>> <unicode at unicode.org> wrote:
>> Hans Åberg wrote,
>> How about using U+0301 COMBINING ACUTE ACCENT: ́
>> Thought about using a combining accent. Figured it would just
>> display with a dotted circle but neglected to try it out first. It
>> actually renders perfectly here. /That's/ good to know. (smile)
>> It is a bit off here. One can try math, too: the derivative of ()
>> is ̇().
>> No it isn't. You should be using a spacing character for
>> Sorry, but there may be different conventions. The dot / double-dot
>> above is definitely common usage in physics.
Also in differential geometry, as for curves.
> Apologies. It was positioned in the parenthesis, and it looked like a
> misplaced U+0301.
In MacOS, one can drop the combined character into the character table, and see that it is U+0307 COMBINING DOT ABOVE.
It comes out right when typeset in ConTeXt.
More information about the Unicode