Re: [bidi] Re: Unicode Collation Algorithm: 4.0 Update (beta)

From: Peter Kirk (peter.r.kirk@ntlworld.com)
Date: Mon Aug 18 2003 - 17:07:20 EDT

  • Next message: Jim Allan: "Re: Clones (was RE: Hexadecimal)"

    On 18/08/2003 13:36, Mark Davis wrote:

    >I'm sorry that you haven't gotten responses before. I have searched through my
    >email archive, and can't find anything like the message, and I don't think it
    >was brought up to the UTC formally.
    >
    >The first one seems odd, and as you say, it would seem to only affect a
    >vanishingly small number of characters; since these are final character, one
    >presumes there would be subsequent characters that would form a larger
    >difference anyway.
    >
    >Mark
    >__________________________________
    >http://www.macchiato.com
    >► “Eppur si muove” ◄
    >
    >----- Original Message -----
    >From: "Matitiahu Allouche" <matial@il.ibm.com>
    >To: "Mark Davis" <mark.davis@jtcsv.com>
    >Cc: <unicode@unicode.org>; <bidi@unicode.org>; <indic@unicode.org>
    >Sent: Monday, August 18, 2003 10:08
    >Subject: [bidi] Re: Unicode Collation Algorithm: 4.0 Update (beta)
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >>I have submitted the following text on the Unicode Reporting form.
    >>
    >>This report relates to the collation tables for Hebrew as displayed in
    >>http://www.unicode.org/charts/collation/beta/chart_Hebrew.html
    >>
    >>I have already formulated the following remarks in the past, but no action
    >>has been taken, so I repeat them here.
    >>
    >>1) Precedence of Dagesh over Final/non-Final: in the chart, the presence
    >>or absence of Dagesh is a Secundary difference, while Final/non-Final is a
    >>Tertiary difference. This is relevant only for letters Kaf and Pe. My
    >>gut feeling says that Final/non-Final should have precedence over
    >>Dagesh/no-Dagesh.
    >>Note that the number of actual cases where this would make a difference is
    >>probably *very* small.
    >>
    >>2) There is something strange in the combinations of Shin with Dagesh and
    >>dots: for all other letters, the form without Dagesh sorts before the form
    >>with Dagesh. But Shin with Sin/Shin dot sort after their corresponding
    >>combinations with Dagesh. I cannot imagine a justification for that.
    >>
    >>I have submitted those reservations to the Technical Committee 2109 of the
    >>SII (Standards Institution of Israel, the Israeli NB), which deals with
    >>Hebrew-related standards in IT, and the committee endorsed my point of
    >>view. I can ask the committee to send you a confirmation letter if
    >>required.
    >>
    >>I would like to see some action taken on my remarks this time, or at least
    >>some justified refutation.
    >>
    >>
    >>Shalom (Regards), Mati
    >> Bidi Architect
    >> Globalization Center Of Competency - Bidirectional Scripts
    >> IBM Israel
    >> Phone: +972 2 5888802 Fax: +972 2 5870333 Mobile: +972 52
    >>554160
    >>
    >>
    >>Sent by: bidi-bounce@unicode.org
    >>To: <unicode@unicode.org>
    >>cc: <bidi@unicode.org>, <indic@unicode.org>
    >>Subject: [bidi] Re: Unicode Collation Algorithm: 4.0 Update (beta)
    >>
    >>
    >>There are also beta collation charts in:
    >>
    >>http://www.unicode.org/charts/collation/beta/
    >>
    >>Mark
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>
    Mati, I am interested to see that you and SII have been giving attention to collation in Hebrew. I have also been doing so, on the recently set up Unicode Hebrew list (hebrew@unicode.org), as I was also concerned about ordering of shin dots, dagesh etc. I have not yet had any reply to my posting on this subject which I made two days ago. I will forward my posting to you in case you have not seen it.

    -- 
    Peter Kirk
    peter@qaya.org (personal)
    peterkirk@qaya.org (work)
    http://www.qaya.org/
    


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Aug 18 2003 - 17:50:31 EDT