Re: Feedback on PR-104

From: Sinnathurai Srivas (
Date: Sun Aug 12 2007 - 18:13:57 CDT

  • Next message: N. Ganesan: "Re: Feedback on PR-104"

    There is no conjunct in Tamil.
    It is either made of two consonants, or meant to mean a single consonant,
    (no conjuncts.).

    For example, ksh in it's split form exactly means two consonants. The other
    is "x", but uses a partially combined glyph form (k+Sh combined=x).

    Tamil already defines NEAR-VOICELESS VOWELS, which CONTRADICTS the conjunct
    theory. With a sopisticated speech spectrum analiser, this Grammar can be
    proved as valid.

    For example, according to Tamil, there is no such thing as PR or BR, but a
    near voiceless vowel always operates on these. Eg,
    BuRook= BRook, in which the u is near voiceless, could be said to operate
    for microsecond duration. PiRantha=PRantha in which i is near voiceless.

    The fundarmentals are different in Tamil. There is no conjunct in Tamil.

    Howerver when transliterating, the contradicting theories need
    consideration. Hence, BuRook in Tamil must be transliterated as BRook in
    English, other wise the the intent will be lost.

    ksh=x, ksh= k + sh, There is no conjunct in Tamil.


    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "N. Ganesan" <>
    To: <>; "Unicode Mailing List" <>
    Cc: "Mark Davis" <>
    Sent: 12 August 2007 10:20
    Subject: Feedback on PR-104

    > When is the last date for submitting feedback on PR-104?
    > Tamil example, like Farsi (Figure 2) is given in:
    > ------
    >>Gmail Have a Bug that strips Zero width Joiners from the
    >>malayalam Mails (Thanks to Cibu!!) . we reported it multiple times but
    >>not solved it yet. (Their buggy implementation is still waiting for
    >>atomic chillu) . So the Quoted text is Just like removed the Letter N
    >>from "Raj Neettiyath" And Responding to "Raj eettiyath"
    > But the current Unicode specifies use of ZWJ for chillus,
    > does MS Hotmail, Yahoo mail work OK with Chillu sequences with ZWJ?
    > Do Googlegroups display Chillu sequences properly? It will be
    > odd (and confusing) if Google mail (gmail) strips ZWJ, while
    > displaying the Chillu sequences correctly in their Blogs, Googlegroups.
    > If Hotmail, Yahoomail, Googlegroups & Blogs display Chils correctly
    > with zwj, it should be pointed out to Google to fix their Gmail.
    > Even if and when atomic Chils come into Unicode, compatibility with 5.0
    > or earlier necessitates the chillu sequences indefinitely in the future.
    > ZWJ with semantic content is not "evil" for Malayalam or Devanagari
    > scripts at all. ZWJ just should not get lost in webpages or in e-mails.
    > There was a proposal to encode <ra, virama, zwj> atomically, it didn't
    > happen in Devanagari script. Perhaps, a similar decision would be good for
    > Malayalam for atomic chillus, atomic reph, atomic prebase, etc.,
    > There is a Rule R5a in the TUS.
    > "R5a For compatibility with The Unicode Standard, Version 2.0, if
    > the dead consonant RA_d precedes zero width joiner, then the
    > haif-consonant form RA_h, depicted as eyelash-RA, is used instead
    > of RA_sup.
    > RA_d + ZWJ -> RA_h"
    > In parallel terms, Another Rule for use of ZWJ in Malayalam script
    > needs to be written. It can be something like,
    > "RXX For compatibility with The Unicode Standard, Version 5.0 or earlier,
    > if the dead consonant C_d precedes zero width joiner, then the
    > haif-consonant form C_h, depicted as Chillu for C, is used instead
    > of the full display of C with an overt virama or C in conjuncted form.
    > C_d + ZWJ -> C_h"
    > In an FAQ entry, a UTN, ... on describing Chillu sequences, and in the
    > next print version of TUS.
    > N. Ganesan

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Aug 12 2007 - 19:03:18 CDT