<html>
<head>
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
</head>
<body>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">The language that gave rise to the
original confusion</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">“U+200D zero width joiner is intended
to produce a more connected rendering of adjacent characters than
would otherwise be the case, if possible...."</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">is not in contradiction (as originally
claimed), because "adjacent" clearly refers to characters
"adjacent" to the ZWJ, not "character that would be adjacent
across a ZWJ". There's nothing in the language that supports that
(mis-)reading. However, simply changing the language to</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">“U+200D zero width joiner is intended
to produce a more connected rendering of characters <b>adjacent
to it</b> than would otherwise be the case, if possible...</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">would prevent that reading. Yet with
that change, the sentence becomes completely impossible to scan.<br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">The problem stems partially from the
desire to make the text on ZWJ and ZWNJ appear (anti-)symmetric.
However, this ignores the fact that they behave very differently
when placed near spaces and start/end of line or text.</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">I would suggest a slight change:<br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><span style="left: 8.33%; top: 68.49%;
font-size: calc(var(--scale-factor)*9.96px); font-family: serif;
transform: scaleX(1.03165);" role="presentation" dir="ltr">Joiner.</span><span
style="left: 14.61%; top: 68.49%; font-size:
calc(var(--scale-factor)*9.96px); font-family: serif;"
role="presentation" dir="ltr"> </span><span style="left:
15.13%; top: 68.48%; font-size:
calc(var(--scale-factor)*9.96px); font-family: sans-serif;
transform: scaleX(0.946876);" role="presentation" dir="ltr">U+200D</span><span
style="left: 23.2%; top: 68.48%; font-size:
calc(var(--scale-factor)*9.96px); font-family: sans-serif;"
role="presentation" dir="ltr"> </span><span style="left:
23.86%; top: 68.48%; font-size:
calc(var(--scale-factor)*9.96px); font-family: sans-serif;
transform: scaleX(1.1203);" role="presentation" dir="ltr">zero
width joiner</span><span style="left: 42.67%; top: 68.48%;
font-size: calc(var(--scale-factor)*9.96px); font-family:
sans-serif;" role="presentation" dir="ltr"> <i><b>requests</b></i></span><span
style="left: 43.33%; top: 68.48%; font-size:
calc(var(--scale-factor)*9.96px); font-family: sans-serif;
transform: scaleX(0.926195);" role="presentation" dir="ltr"><i><b>
</b></i>a more connected rendering</span><br
role="presentation">
<span style="left: 8.33%; top: 70.44%; font-size:
calc(var(--scale-factor)*9.96px); font-family: sans-serif;
transform: scaleX(0.90403);" role="presentation" dir="ltr"
class="">of <span class="highlight selected appended">adjacen</span>t
characters than would otherwise be the case. <br>
</span></div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><span style="left: 8.33%; top: 70.44%;
font-size: calc(var(--scale-factor)*9.96px); font-family:
sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.90403);" role="presentation"
dir="ltr" class=""><br>
</span></div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><span style="left: 8.33%; top: 70.44%;
font-size: calc(var(--scale-factor)*9.96px); font-family:
sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.90403);" role="presentation"
dir="ltr" class="">where "requests" replaced the curious
"intends to produce". And we can delete the "if possible"
because if not possible, its only a request and no request can
be satisfied in situations where that is not possible. The
remaining text below the bullets already covers that case,
should there be any doubts.<br>
</span></div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><span style="left: 8.33%; top: 70.44%;
font-size: calc(var(--scale-factor)*9.96px); font-family:
sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.90403);" role="presentation"
dir="ltr" class=""><br>
</span></div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><span style="left: 8.33%; top: 70.44%;
font-size: calc(var(--scale-factor)*9.96px); font-family:
sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.90403);" role="presentation"
dir="ltr" class="">However, I would suggest we add a bullet:</span></div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><span style="left: 8.33%; top: 70.44%;
font-size: calc(var(--scale-factor)*9.96px); font-family:
sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.90403);" role="presentation"
dir="ltr" class=""><br>
</span></div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><span style="left: 8.33%; top: 70.44%;
font-size: calc(var(--scale-factor)*9.96px); font-family:
sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.90403);" role="presentation"
dir="ltr" class="">* A typical use of ZWJ is to show the
connected form of a character without a visible neighbor.</span></div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><span style="left: 8.33%; top: 70.44%;
font-size: calc(var(--scale-factor)*9.96px); font-family:
sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.90403);" role="presentation"
dir="ltr" class=""><br>
</span></div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><span style="left: 8.33%; top: 70.44%;
font-size: calc(var(--scale-factor)*9.96px); font-family:
sans-serif; transform: scaleX(0.90403);" role="presentation"
dir="ltr" class=""><br>
</span></div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix"><br>
</div>
<div class="moz-cite-prefix">On 3/14/2023 5:30 PM, Peter Constable
via Unicode wrote:<br>
</div>
<blockquote type="cite"
cite="mid:DS0PR12MB75355FEFE4351112549B9BE286BF9@DS0PR12MB7535.namprd12.prod.outlook.com">
<meta http-equiv="Content-Type" content="text/html; charset=UTF-8">
<meta name="Generator" content="Microsoft Word 15 (filtered
medium)">
<style>@font-face
{font-family:"Cordia New";
panose-1:2 11 3 4 2 2 2 2 2 4;}@font-face
{font-family:"Cambria Math";
panose-1:2 4 5 3 5 4 6 3 2 4;}@font-face
{font-family:DengXian;
panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1;}@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}@font-face
{font-family:"\@DengXian";
panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1;}p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}span.EmailStyle18
{mso-style-type:personal-reply;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;
color:windowtext;}.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;}div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}</style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]-->
<div class="WordSection1">
<p class="MsoNormal">From Unicode 15, section 9.2 (p. 375):<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">“The Non-joiner and the Joiner. The Unicode
Standard provides two user-selectable for<span
style="font-size:11.0pt;font-family:"Calibri",sans-serif;mso-fareast-language:ZH-CN">[1]</span>matting
codes: U+200C zero width non-joiner and U+200D zero width
joiner. The use of a joiner adjacent to a suitable letter
permits that letter to form a cursive connection without a
visible neighbor. This provides a simple way to encode some
special cases, such as exhibiting a connecting form in
isolation, as shown in Figure 9-2.”<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Later in that section (p. 383), ZWJ is
listed in the Join_Causing set of Arabic joining types<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">It seems to me the text is describing the
original intent as Asmus described.<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal">Peter<o:p></o:p></p>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div style="border:none;border-top:solid #E1E1E1
1.0pt;padding:3.0pt 0in 0in 0in">
<p class="MsoNormal"><b>From:</b> Unicode
<a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:unicode-bounces@corp.unicode.org"><unicode-bounces@corp.unicode.org></a> <b>On Behalf Of
</b>Jukka K. Korpela via Unicode<br>
<b>Sent:</b> Tuesday, February 21, 2023 4:56 AM<br>
<b>To:</b> Asmus Freytag <a class="moz-txt-link-rfc2396E" href="mailto:asmusf@ix.netcom.com"><asmusf@ix.netcom.com></a><br>
<b>Cc:</b> <a class="moz-txt-link-abbreviated" href="mailto:unicode@corp.unicode.org">unicode@corp.unicode.org</a><br>
<b>Subject:</b> Re: Zero-Width Joiner U+200D<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> Asmus Freytag via Unicode (<a
href="mailto:unicode@corp.unicode.org" target="_blank"
moz-do-not-send="true" class="moz-txt-link-freetext">unicode@corp.unicode.org</a>)
wrote:<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC
1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in
6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">I think we need to look at
whether the language accurately reflects what we
were trying to say. I do know that it was revised at
one point, when the use of ZWJ was generalized
beyond cursive connection.
<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">It seems that this took place as
early as in Unicode 2.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"> <o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<blockquote style="border:none;border-left:solid #CCCCCC
1.0pt;padding:0in 0in 0in
6.0pt;margin-left:4.8pt;margin-right:0in">
<div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">The interpretation you suggest
may be an inadvertent result of that change, or
someone had found out why the usage that I always
understood as intended is for some reason
problematic. In that case, it should be excluded
more explicitly, in my view.<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">In fact, reading chapter 23 onwards,
I now see the use of ZWJ’s around a character to ask for
isolated form. It was just so far from the place that
described ZWJ and ZWNJ between adjacent characters,
giving the impression that this is their only use.
Perhaps it would help to remove the word “adjacent” from
“U+200D zero width joiner is intended to produce a more
connected rendering of adjacent characters than would
otherwise be the case, if possible.<br>
<br>
The text describes the use of ZWJ for isolated form and
shows this in example 23-1. Sorry for the confusion I
caused.<br>
<br>
So the answer to Andreas’ question is “yes, it should”,
with the value of “should” roughly as “is intended to,
according to the Unicode standard, but a program that
renders Unicode characters is not required to obey, or
even understand, such rendering suggestions”<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal"><o:p> </o:p></p>
</div>
<div>
<p class="MsoNormal">Jukka<o:p></o:p></p>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</div>
</blockquote>
<p><br>
</p>
</body>
</html>