RE: Suggestions in Unicode Indic FAQ

From: Marco Cimarosti (
Date: Thu Jan 30 2003 - 04:20:59 EST

  • Next message: Keyur Shroff: "RE: Suggestions in Unicode Indic FAQ"

    Kent Karlsson wrote:
    > Keyur Shroff wrote
    > [...]
    > > In Indic scripts any sign that appear in text not in
    > > conjunction with a
    > > valid consonant base may be rendered with dotted circle as fallback
    > > mechanism (Section 5.14 "Rendering Nonspacing Marks"
    > >
    > I don't know where you find support for that position in that text.
    > Can you please quote? There are no "invalid base consonants" for
    > any dependent vowel (for Indic scripts; similarly for any
    > other script).

    Actually, there is a mention of displaying combining marks on dotted

            "Several methods are available to deal with an unknown composed
    character sequence that is outside of a fixed, renderable set [...]. One
    method (Show Hidden) indicates the inability to draw the sequence by drawing
    the base character first and then rendering the nonspacing mark as an
    individual unit - with the nonspacing mark positioned on a dotted circle."
    (The Unicode Standard 3.0, page 120 - 5.14 Rendering Nonspacing Marks -
    Fallback Rendering)

    I add that this is a good way of displaying a combining mark that has no
    base character, i.e. one occurring at the begin of a line or paragraph.

    However, I totally agree with Kent that this funny rendering is *not* a
    requirement of the Unicode standard, as Keyur Shroff seems to suggest. It is
    just an example of many "several methods [that] are available to deal with"
    strange sequences.

    > > Any system implementing this as
    > > default behaviour should not be considered buggy.
    > Indeed they are. And it should certainly not be default behaviour.

    In this case, I disagree with Kent: displaying these dotted circles is not
    mandatory, but certainly not a bug.

    > Any combining characters can be placed on any base characters without
    > there being any dotted circles displayed.

    True. But notice that Kent (against his own opinion) correctly wrote "can",
    not "must".

    > [...]

    _ Marco

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jan 30 2003 - 04:58:34 EST