From: Richard Wordingham (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Thu Apr 20 2006 - 14:10:23 CST
Michael Everson wrote on Thursday, April 20, 2006 at 5:59 AM
re: [indic] Welsh Collation (was: Discussion about two Telugu consonant
>>>At 22:37 +0100 2006-04-19, Richard Wordingham wrote:
>>>>I seemed to be in a minority of one when I suggested that in Welsh
>>>>'Llangollen' should be spelt with a CGJ so that the sequence 'ng' would
>>>>not be confused with the Welsh 'letter' 'ng', which sorts between 'g'
Michael Everson wrote:
>>>The Welsh do
> not use CGJ.
The current, natural meaning of CGJ (= combining grapheme jibber?) was only
formalised in March 2005 (Unicode 4.1.0). Some of us are using applications
that completely predate CGJ (introduced in Unicode 3.2.0, March 2002) e.g.
Word 2000 on Windows 2000 at my workplace, and many private individuals are
still using Windows 98 or ME. On that system, Internet Explorer 6.0
displays CGJ as the missing glyph. IE 6.0 also renders CGJ as the missing
glyph on my Windows XP SP2 system, whereas Firefox does not, but that could
be just be a font or font selection issue. (The IE 6.0 behaviour may not be
totally unreasonable, given that CGJ may affect the rendering in the Hebrew
and Fraktur scripts.) Both browsers work fine when Code2000 is specified as
the font, and Word XP seems to handle the non-display of CGJ fine - better
than it handles ZWJ!
Given these circumstances, it is too early for CGJ to be in general use with
the Latin script anywhere, though the Welsh Language Board does say that
software should understand it
(http://www.bwrdd-yr-iaith.org.uk/download.php/pID=66182.1). At present,
one can only safely use it when one knows the applications that will be
called upon to interpret it.
This does not mean that CGJ should not be used in Welsh, merely that it
cannot be used until installations catch up with Unicode.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Apr 20 2006 - 14:18:55 CST