Re: Major Defect in Combining classes of Tibetan Vowels

From: Christopher John Fynn (
Date: Sun Jun 22 2003 - 00:42:49 EDT

  • Next message: Michael Everson: "Re: Revised N2586R"


    By "relative ordering" I did not mean relative collation weights
    but the order in which these combining characters are usually
    entered relative to other characters and each other - and the
    order relative to each other in which they should be stored in a
    string. The current CCCV weights for these characters mean that
    they can end up in a bizarre order which makes no sense, serves
    no useful purpose and complicates rendering and collation .

    The only thing I did mention specifically about collation is
    that 0F7E 0F82 and 0F83 should generally treated as equivalent
    for collation purposes. Culturally correct collation rules for
    Dzongkha and Tibetan are *very* complex when compared with those
    for any other language I know of and I don't want to get into
    all that here.

    - Chris

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Jun 22 2003 - 01:26:05 EDT