Re: Tamil sha (U+0BB6) - deprecate it?

From: James Kass (
Date: Mon Jun 27 2005 - 19:37:46 CDT

  • Next message: Sinnathurai Srivas: "Re: Tamil sha (U+0BB6) - deprecate it?"

    Sinnathurai Srivas wrote,

    > Unlike Latin comparison, all Indic languages were changed by this
    > method. Tamil has it's own system. Allowing script against the rules of
    > Grammar will break the Grammar, probably as the first attack. It is
    > billion strong and has the desire to break Tamil. I hope you see this
    > with understanding.

    Nothing will break the Grammar. The Grammar has withstood the
    tests of time. It exists in various printed forms in the original as
    well as in various translations.

    It is available now in electronic format in Unicode at:

    Like John Hudson, I am trying to understand your objection. But, I
    do not understand how the addition of U+0BB6 to a computer text
    encoding standard can force any changes to the Unicode version of
    Tolkappiyam linked above, or force any changes to all of the printed

    > In the case of Tamil, SK script is being added in code spaces allocated for
    > Tamil to forcefully say Tamil has canonism in Characters.

    Even though not everyone agrees on the exact nature of the
    relationship between Brahmi and Grantha and Tamil, we should
    all be able to agree that a historic relationship exists.

    Is it possible that these letters are being added to the Tamil range
    simply because:

    1) The historic relationship between Grantha and Tamil exists.
    2) The reserved characters in the Tamil range are not being used for
         anything else at this time.
    3) The Basic Multilingual Plane doesn't have a lot of reserved characters
         any more.
    4) The Tamil range seems like a logical place for them.
    5) They are needed in order to make electronic versions of old texts.?

    Best regards,

    James Kass

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Jun 27 2005 - 19:38:53 CDT