dchandler 5d053b41fe Found another inconsistency between Unicode and the TM/TMW docs. I've sent e-mail to Tony Duff asking who's right, but I'm putting this in the errata under the assumption that even if Unicode is wrong, Unicode's wrong view will somehow rule the day. ... Also, TMW->EWTS now generates \uF021-\uF0FF or \u0F00-\u0FFF escapes when appropriate. A few TMW glyphs still give errors. Also, there's now a test to be sure that TM<->TMW and TMW->EWTS won't break in the future (except for the one glyph in TMW that isn't in TM, that one isn't tested). The baselines have not been hand-verified, but changes will be detected.		2003-11-24 05:49:15 +00:00
..
apache/commons/jrcs	Initial revision	2003-07-14 12:22:29 +00:00
thdl	Found another inconsistency between Unicode and the TM/TMW docs. I've sent e-mail to Tony Duff asking who's right, but I'm putting this in the errata under the assumption that even if Unicode is wrong, Unicode's wrong view will somehow rule the day.	2003-11-24 05:49:15 +00:00