L2/16-302

Feedback on L2/16-294 on Gurmukhi
Shriramana Sharma, jamadagni-at-gmail-dot-com, India
2016-Oct-28

The author of L2/16-294 wishes for the glyph of 0A75 YAKASH to be changed as
shown in the attestations. That should not be a problem and indeed seems
appropriate.

However, the author is also asking for:

1) the post-base (i.e. cluster-final) YA to be encoded as a separate character
(note that this is basically like the Bengali YA-phalaa for which one has often
heard requests for separate encoding)

2) for its current representation by VIRAMA + YA to be "replaced" by the new
character,

3) for the yakash, for which a separate character is already encoded, to be
instead represented by this sequence i.e. VIRAMA + YA.

The above three changes cannot be done because of the huge amount of data that
has probably already been generated by using VIRAMA + YA for the post-base YA
and the individual character for the yakash. Also, the sequence VIRAMA + YA is
not and will never be canonically equivalent to the YAKASH and so cannot be used
to represent that overriding its current usage for the post-base YA.

-o-