Re: Sinhala naming conventions

From: Otto Stolz <>
Date: Tue, 17 Jul 2012 13:25:59 +0200

Hello Naena Guru,

am 2012-07-15 20:36, schrieb Naena Guru:
> my challenge stands [...] to show how romanized Singhala violates
> any standard in what specific way.

Your “Romanized Singhala” neither complys with, nor
hurts any standard. As it is your own invention, it
is simply out of scope of all existing standards.

However, tagging your “Romanized Singhala” as ISO 8859-1
encoded text, certainly violates several standards!
E. g., ISO 8859-1 defines code 41 (hex) to be a
Latin character (viz. “A”); so this code can never
represent a Singhala letter, when it is part of an
an ISO 8859-1 encoded text. Likewise, your scheme
violates all pertinent standards of text tagging,
such as RFC 2046: All of those describe how the
encoding of a particular data stream is specified,
so the receiving side will interprete it correctly.
Clearly, if you send a Latin character (and tag it
as such), you cannot expect the receiving side to
interprete it as a Singhalese character.

So, the only way for your encoding scheme to be
exploited without violating the pertinent standards
would be to register it under a new name, and then
tag your data accordingly. However, as there are
apparently no technical problems with the existing
solution (i. e. properly tagged Unicode data), your
new encoding scheme will properly not gain wide ac-

You can serve your language much better when you
try to improve current solutions within the realm
of existing standards. E. g., you could point out
errors (or shortcomings) in existing fonts, editors,
keyboard drivers, and other software and suggest
(or even provide) better solutions. Or you could
publish tutorials or examples of good practice.
In any case, it would be wise to know the existing
standards and comply with them.

Best wishes,
   Otto Stolz
Received on Tue Jul 17 2012 - 06:31:48 CDT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0 : Tue Jul 17 2012 - 06:31:49 CDT