Re: [indic] Re: [unicode] Re: Ligatures For Indic languages

From: Rahul Bhalerao (
Date: Tue Jun 17 2008 - 05:46:43 CDT

  • Next message: Dagvadorj Galbadrakh: "About Mongolian characters in Unicode"

    On Sat, May 31, 2008 at 8:32 AM, Harshula <> wrote:
    > Hi Abhijit,
    > On Fri, 2008-05-30 at 16:17 +0530, AbhijitDutta अभिजित অভিজিত্ wrote:
    >> I also want to re-iterate that "glyph-formation" is connected with the
    >> Input Method.
    > The encoding and the layout engine determine the "glyph-formation". The
    > input method determines the key sequences that generate the
    > encoding. Simply, the encoding is the interface between the layout
    > engine and the input method. Your usage of "connected" in this context
    > is tenuous and unclear.
    >> The Sinhala approach of forming their characters - while
    >> almost identical to those of Indian scripts - and subject to the same
    >> principles - is determined by slight changes in their keyboard design. (
    >> e.g. the "Kombuva" range of "Two-part or Split matras" which are similar to
    >> those in Tamil and Bengali are generated in visual sequence and not
    >> linguistic sequence. )
    > The Wijesekera keyboard layout (The SCCII standard keyboard) uses a
    > 'visual' system. i.e. You press a key for each component of a
    > glyph/syllable. However, with Sinhala phonetic/transliteration schemes
    > you press keys based on the phonemes that constitute the glyph/syllable.
    >> So, while the basis for character-generation would be the same in Sinhala.
    >> Its handling by the Layout Engine would be different.
    > Could you please elaborate on your statement? What do you mean by
    > "character-generation"? There are subtle differences in how a layout
    > engine treats Sinhala compared to Indian scripts, but it has absolutely
    > nothing to do with a particular input method.

    Actually there isn't much difference between the orthography of
    Sinhala script from that of Indian scripts.
    But the rendering and input methods have significant differences.
    The difference is in Indian scripts conjunct formation is of form:
    Consonant + Virama + Consonant
    The similar conjunct formation for Sinhala uses the sequence:
    Consonant + Virama + ZWJ + Consonant

    This additional ZWJ, (IMO although not necessary,) was added in a
    standard adopted by Govt. and industry in Srilanka and fonts were
    developed with this logic.
    The ZWJ is abstracted from user by adding it automatically through
    input methods like wijesekera. The inclusion of ZWJ also removes the
    'reph' processing for sinhala 'repaya'.
    I think these are the only essential differences.

    Anyway the orthography of Indian scripts makes the current Unicode
    implementation to be good enough and we do not need to encode whole
    set of ligatures.


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Jun 17 2008 - 05:51:35 CDT