From: Valeriy E. Ushakov (email@example.com)
Date: Wed Jun 25 2003 - 11:47:26 EDT
On Wed, Jun 25, 2003 at 07:31:51 -0700, Andrew C. West wrote:
> > Err, as in this particular case one vowel sign is above and the other
> > one is below the stack - i.e. they don't interact spatially - you
> > cannot really distinguish them. ;)
> I know that the vowel signs do not interact with each other
> typographically, but what's that got to do with anything ? I'm
> talking about the logical ordering of the Unicode codepoints used to
> encode some Tibetan text, not the physical appearance of the glyphs
> that are used to render that sequence of codepoints.
> What I'm suggesting is that although "cui" <0F45, 0F74, 0F72> and
> "ciu" <0F45, 0F72, 0F74> should be rendered identically, the logical
> ordering of the codepoints representing the vowels may represent
> lexical differences that would be lost during the process of
And given that the two look identical in writing in the first palce,
this lexical difference had a chance to originate exactly *where*?
You are putting the cart before the horse.
Also note that the original question from Chris is about things that
do interact spatially.
-- firstname.lastname@example.org | Zu Grunde kommen http://www.ptc.spbu.ru/~uwe/ | Ist zu Grunde gehen
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jun 25 2003 - 12:40:12 EDT