From: Michael Everson (email@example.com)
Date: Thu Nov 27 2003 - 19:04:54 EST
At 17:58 -0800 2003-11-26, Peter Constable wrote:
> The Indian gov't doc at http://tdil.mit.gov.in/ori-guru-telu.pdf
>describes the conjunct shown in the attached PNG as being pronounced
>as though NNA + VIRAMA + DDA (0B21). The component attached to the
>NNA otherwise represents TA (0B24), however.
It would be just sooooo cool if you would say what page and column
and line of that document you are referring to.
>My question is this: should this conjunct be encoded as < 0B23 NNA,
>0B4D VIRAMA, 0B24 TA > or as < 0B23 NNA, 0B4D VIRAMA, 0B21 DDA >?
On the empty evidence of your one gif I would say it is TA, but
honestly, decisions should not be made on the basis of patchy stuff
like this. Indian government document or not, there is no evidence
there to base decisions on.
-- Michael Everson * * Everson Typography * * http://www.evertype.com
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Nov 27 2003 - 20:08:22 EST