From: "Antoine Leca" <Antoine.Leca@renault.fr>
> Sorry, what is "the other form"? As I see things, in Tamil Nadu the
> use is write NNAI exactly the same as, for example, KAI (that is, without
> the "elephant-trunk" form that TUS appears to require).
There are two forms, with and without the "elphant trunk." Both are used by
native speakers, albeit in different contexts.
> BTW, Tamil people are actually proposing a much more radical
> solution: dropping the present way and rather encode the syllabes.
> See the proceedings of the conference held in July in Singapore
Well, i doubt the Unicode standard is not going to go along with the *ultra*
radical proposals.... and honestly, I doubt that the people in Tamil Nadu
will, either (if they did, then eventually Unicode would pick it up).
I am mostly done with some proposed changes to the block description that I
will put forward for the next UTC meeting, but I am waiting for some
thoughts on whether the general preference in this sort of situation would
1) encode a couple of new characters
2) use a grapheme joiner in a new way and suggest that it be used for this
3) encode a new type of character for the joining
4) give up and leave it to the fonts
I will only heavily be against #4, but some guidance on the general thoughts
about which of #1 through #3 would be the ideal approach for Unicode would
help me create a proposed change more likely to be "blessed" in San Diego.
> however, since representants of the Tamil Nadu state are now members of
> Unicode consortium, I believe that unicore is rather the list where these
> things are discussed (can anyone confirm/infirm?)
There has not yet been that sort of discussion since I have been there. But
I would love to get this type of feedback to the proposal (and will actively
seek out their input on this matter, I think it is wonderful that they can
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:13 EDT