From: Kent Karlsson (email@example.com)
Date: Sun Apr 02 2006 - 03:45:46 CST
Rajeev J Sebastian wrote:
> On Sunday 02 April 2006 13:30, James Kass wrote:
> > Good! They shouldn't be. The text Kenneth Whistler submitted from
> > 5.0 could be construed to suggest that they will become equivalent in
> > Unicode 5.0, though. That's why I asked and what started this thread.
Ken does NOT suggest they become equivalent. He just formulated
succinctly part of the things I've tried to explain to James.
> A cursory look at Whistler's proposal, it seems a good idea
I agree (after more than a cursory look).
> > If it is Unicode's official position that traditional Malayalam
> > use U+0D4C and that reformed Malayalam must use U+0D57,
That would be it. And it's so obvious that that is how it must work
that I worry that if you (James) have such a hard time with it, how
many other more subtle issues in Unicode you've gotten all wrong.
> > then Malayalam rendering engineers may recommend that
> > traditional Malayalam fonts be designed with traditional
> > AU glyphs at both code positions and reformed fonts with
> > reformed glyphs there.
Certainly not (and even if someone does recommend that, (s)he
should not get it, since it is so wrong).
(Aside: the number of glyphs in table 9-11 is
so small that it can hardly be too much work to put those
ligated traditional glyphs (for the case where there is a ZWJ
just before the vowel mark, and only then) in just about any
> All in all, Whistler's comment that this is a "dead horse" is
> particularly apt here.
I agree. And I'm getting rather tired of beating this particular
dead horse, despite James's opposition. I leave it to the UTC
to make a more official statement on the issue if they so desire
(and to a certain company to correct its software, incl. fonts,
specs, and FAQs).
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Apr 02 2006 - 03:48:21 CST