Re: Sindhi characters proposed

From: Michael Everson (
Date: Sat Apr 02 2005 - 11:32:21 CST

  • Next message: vlad: "Re: Security Issues"

    At 05:24 -0800 2005-04-02, Patrick Andries wrote:

    >>If the mark of implosivity were encoded as separate, then yes,
    >>you'd have to have to do extra work to get the fused forms.
    >[PA] Given what the Devanagari rendering engines already do
    >(conjuncts, virama, handling of ra), this may not be such a problem
    >if they were benefits to encoding a productive separate combining

    I do not believe that there are; nor do I believe that this combining
    mark is productive.

    >>Implosive consonants are rare, for one. IPA gives symbols for five
    >>of them, four of which are used in Sindhi (BBA 0253, DDDA 0257, GGA
    >>0260, JJA 0284). The one which isn't is the voiced uvular implosive
    >>(029B). Devanagari doesn't have a symbol for the voiced uvular stop
    >>(0262) either. The IPA Handbook gives Mam (a Mayan language) as
    >>using the voiced uvular implosive.
    >[PA] Thank you for these precisions, which I think should have been
    >in the proposal

    It did not occur to me that it was necessary as it seemed self-evident.

    >a combining mark will not be very productive here since the set of
    >implosives does not seem to be open.
    >Well, technically, I suppose, all of these phonetic sets are closed,
    >but here the set is apparently of known cardinality and of very
    >small cardinality.

    "Cardinality" is apparently a mathematical term meaning "the number
    of elements in a set or other grouping, as a property of that
    grouping". Accordingly, I have no idea what you are talking about.

    When I propose characters for encoding, I look at the evidence of
    their usage. In this case, the letter-modification interacts with the
    base character in the same way as the horizontal bar does in Latin,
    as I pointed out earlier. Our practice is to encode such characters
    uniquely, and not to try to rely on smart fonts to render them
    correctly. Further, as I pointed out, there is an advantage here to
    allow the matras attach directly to the implosive letters, rather
    than to allow a possible spelling difference by introducing a
    combining mark, particularly as there is already a similar combining
    mark that has a different behaviour but a similar shape.

    I trust that the UTC and WG2 will approve these characters as proposed.

    Michael Everson * * Everson Typography *  *

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Apr 02 2005 - 11:34:52 CST