From: Mark Davis (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Fri Mar 17 2006 - 13:26:20 CST
The purpose in the standard for describing the rendering of different
scripts is not to limit the range of variations available to type
designers. It is really to establish how a given string that a user sees
is to be represented internally. For complex scripts, the ordering (and
to a certain degree the shaping behavior) has to be a fundamental part
of the encoding standard; otherwise it is impossible to get
interoperability across systems.
Antoine Leca wrote:
> Philippe Verdy wrote:
>> Mandatory things like visual inversions (of vowel signs letters
>> beforethe consonnant cluster, or of a leading dead RA after the
>> consonnant letter) MUST still be specified in TUS.
> Thanks for giving me the hand!
> You can specify when there is an unambiguous behaviour to be followed.
> Unfortunately, this is not always the case.
> Example 1, Hindi: should the I matra precedes the whole cluster, or only the
> last freestanding consonant, in the case of a cluster constituted from two
> or more visually distinct components?
> Example 2, Malayalam: dead RA can come either _before_ the (last part of
> the) consonant, or _below_ it.
> Not _quite_ the same thing, particularly if you contrast it with the fact
> that Uniscribe (and several similar rendering tools) will reorder the
> leading RA before the consonant in the backing store, but it will not do
> this reorder for a subjoined RA...
> Example 3, Malayalam again: the matra for AU U+0D4C can be shown either as
> two parts (as depicted in the tables), or only as the right part.
> Now what exactly can *mandate* the Standard (if it were in charge of, which
> it is not, as I remember earlier)?
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Mar 17 2006 - 13:29:05 CST