Re: Run-time checking of fonts for Sinhala support

From: Harshula (
Date: Thu Sep 03 2009 - 07:54:49 CDT

  • Next message: Doug Ewell: "Re: Run-time checking of fonts for Sinhala support"

    Hi Roozbeh,

    On Thu, 2009-08-27 at 11:47 -0700, Roozbeh Pournader wrote:
    > On Fri, 2009-08-28 at 02:01 +1000, Harshula wrote:
    > > Please elaborate if you actually found examples of contradictions. I
    > > have CC'd those involved in the preparation of the documents.
    > That's already on my to-do list. I am already in contact with Gihan
    > Dias.

    Great, I'll ask Gihan about the contradictions you say you found.

    > > > "'Computer systems preloaded with Sinhala' claiming to conform to SLS
    > > > 1134:2004 should include at least one Sinhala font, preferably
    > > > conforming to SLS 1134:2004 Level-1 font requirements."
    > >
    > > 1) You say "should include at least"? Surely you mean "shall include at
    > > least".
    > I understand. The term "shall" in SLS 1134 probably means "MUST", not
    > "SHOULD".

    I'm not sure how familiar you are with specification documents, perhaps
    you should read:

    > > 2) You say "preferably conforming to"? Surely you mean "confirming to".
    > I don't understand this one.

    "preferably" implies that it is recommended but optional.

    > > 4.3 Computer Systems preloaded with Sinhala
    > > When a vendor provides the entire computer system preloaded
    > > with Sinhala, the user shall be able to work with Sinhala Unicode,
    > > without installing any third party component in the computer
    > > system. At a minimum the following components shall be provided
    > > with the computer system:
    > > a) Sinhala Display and printer driver
    > > b) Sinhala Keyboard and keyboard driver
    > > c) One Sinhala font
    > >
    > > This system shall support Unicode-aware applications running in
    > > Sinhala. The *three components* listed above *shall* have the
    > > *specifications described under section 4.1.and 4.2.*

    Notice how it is *mandatory* to have at least one Sinhala font that is
    Level 1 compliant. It is not optional.

    > It does *not* say that the 'computer system' should check the other
    > Sinhala fonts later installed to see if they have the specifications
    > described in the earlier sections.

    I agree you have successfully exploited a loophole in section 4.3. The
    *intent* of section 4.3 is to have at least one Level 1 compliant
    Sinhala font that is *used* by the UI. Thus ensuring that a correct and
    standardised UI is presented to the user.

    It is pointless having a Level 1 compliant Sinhala font sitting *unused*
    on the filesystem, whilst the operating system choses a random
    non-compliant font that will present an incorrect and non-standard UI to
    the user. Therefore, the operating system needs to select a Level 1
    compliant font by default to ensure a correct and standardised UI.

    Hence my original question:

    > > So, if SLS1134:Part2
    > > stated something like 'Operating systems shall only recognise Level 1
    > > compliant fonts as Sinhala fonts.', would that be sufficiently explicit
    > > in your mind?
    > No.

    So, could you please suggest a phrase, that you are happy with, that
    would close the loophole?


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Sep 03 2009 - 07:56:40 CDT