Re: Representative glyphs for combining kannada signs

From: Vinod Kumar (
Date: Thu Mar 16 2006 - 23:41:44 CST

  • Next message: Michael Everson: "Re: New symbol for Russian rouble?"

    On 3/17/06, Antoine Leca <> wrote:

    > I never considered TUS as the ultimate truth in the matter of Indic scripts,
    > but accepting this...

    > Of course, if font designers ONLY base thir work on TUS, the result is
    > unlikely to be of ultimate quality.
    > However, I do no believe this is common behaviour.
    My take on this is:

    TUS should be an outcome of the linguistic and script specific
    knowledge. All questions, fights and solutions should be in the
    standard formation phase. The font and software designer or
    implementor should work on the basis of the standard alone and not
    raise questions about lingusitic and script issues when designing the
    font or software. If a font or software designer has reservations
    about the standard, she can raise them in the standards development
    process. But a font or software designer who (blindly) follows the
    standard cannot be accused of doing a wrong thing. The wrongs, if
    any, belong to the standardization process. I also feel that the
    software (font) designer should exercise her script specific expertize
    and implement correct behaviour even if the standard says otherwise.
    She breaks the standard but accepts that the software is not standard
    compliant and defends her action. Hopefully the standard will be
    corrected or improved.

    Vinod Kumar

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Mar 17 2006 - 02:41:06 CST