Re: Tibetan/Burmese/Khmer

From: Mark Leisher (
Date: Sat Jan 18 1997 - 10:57:00 EST

    Rick> Pre-coded subjoined things may make sense for Khmer, but I don't
    Rick> know enough about the script or the group of languages written with
    Rick> it to hazard an opinion about that. In general, all of the
    Rick> Brahmic-derived scripts can be successfully encoded without
    Rick> pre-coded subjunctions; the tastefulness and practicality of such an
    Rick> encoding depends on the evolution and usage of the particular script
    Rick> in its milieu.

Just a note "from the implementation field" with regard to Khmer: I have found
that supporting Khmer in the same fashion as the Indic scripts has worked out
pretty well. Having subjoined elements encoded separately (the way I did it
originally for Kannada, Khmer, and Telegu; using the PUA, of course)
complicated the technical aspects quite a bit. Some linguists using our stuff
have mentioned that for Brahmic-derived scripts, they prefer the "canonical"
form in the backing store for processing purposes.
Mark Leisher "A designer knows he has achieved perfection
Computing Research Lab not when there is nothing left to add, but
New Mexico State University when there is nothing left to take away."
Box 30001, Dept. 3CRL -- Antoine de Saint-Exup'ery
Las Cruces, NM 88003

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:33 EDT