Why was L2/25-061 provisionally assigned?

[Charlotte Eiffel Lilith Buff]

Which would be the canonical representation, spacing low line + combining
line above or spacing high line + combining line below? Any font that
bothered to define proper anchor points for diacritics on modifier symbols
would display both sequences identically.

Am Do., 17. Apr. 2025 um 21:41 Uhr schrieb piotrunio-2004 at wp.pl via Unicode
<unicode at corp.unicode.org>:

> The way I see it is that U+02C8 and U+02CC are spacing versions of U+030D
> and U+0329 diacritics, and therefore to compose a spacing character with
> both diacritics, the spacing character of one and combining character of
> the other could be used. And there is already precedent of spacing
> diacritics composed with combining characters, particularly U+0385 which is
> composed as U+00A8 U+0301 (although the precomposed version is encoded as
> it's essential for CP869, CP1253, and ISO 8859-7 compatibility).
>
> Dnia 17 kwietnia 2025 21:05 Doug Ewell via Unicode <
> unicode at corp.unicode.org> napisał(a):
>
> piotrunio-2004 at wp.pl wrote:
>
> I really don't get why [the character proposed in] L2/25-061 would be
> provisionally assigned to U+208F when it can be composed with
> combining characters (ˈ̩ U+02C8 U+0329) or (ˌ̍ U+02CC U+030D) which
> should be equivalent to the proposed character, and the potential use
> of the existing combining characters is not mentioned in the proposal,
> but the proposal owner was informed of the compositions before the
> Recommendations to UTC #183 were made.
>
>
> While the quoted passage on the Submitting Character Proposals page makes
> sense for “normal letter with diacritic” proposals, which were once
> commonplace, I don’t think it’s typical to attach combining marks to a
> modifier letter such as U+02C8 or U+02CC, or for UTC to recommend
> composition in such cases.
>
> The NormalizationTest file does not include any instances of combining
> characters used with modifier letters, except for a few wacky,
> cross-script, stress-test cases involving a combination of Latin letters,
> Hebrew accents, and Adlam modifiers.
>
> Perhaps someone has authoritative info on whether the difference in
> handling is policy or just the way it’s been.
>
> --
> Doug Ewell, CC, ALB | Lakewood, CO, US | ewellic.org
>
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://corp.unicode.org/pipermail/unicode/attachments/20250417/e9101328/attachment.htm>