Re: Major Defect in Combining Classes of Tibetan Vowels

From: Michael \(michka\) Kaplan (michka@trigeminal.com)
Date: Wed Jun 25 2003 - 11:55:47 EDT

  • Next message: Valeriy E. Ushakov: "Re: Major Defect in Combining Classes of Tibetan Vowels"

    Let me add that this was the case recently for Hebrew (to mention on
    example). So it is certainly not impossible.

    But we have enough real work to do that we should do our best to veer from
    the theoretical. :-)

    MichKa

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Michael (michka) Kaplan" <michka@trigeminal.com>
    To: <unicode@unicode.org>; "Andrew C. West"
    <andrewcwest@alumni.princeton.edu>
    Sent: Wednesday, June 25, 2003 8:11 AM
    Subject: Re: Major Defect in Combining Classes of Tibetan Vowels

    > From: "Andrew C. West" <andrewcwest@alumni.princeton.edu>
    >
    > > What I'm suggesting is that although "cui" <0F45, 0F74, 0F72> and "ciu"
    > <0F45,
    > > 0F72, 0F74> should be rendered identically, the logical ordering of the
    > > codepoints representing the vowels may represent lexical differences
    that
    > would
    > > be lost during the process of normalisation.
    >
    > Do you (or does anyone) have an actual example where this is the case? It
    > may well be true but until someone has a proof there is not really an
    > indication of a specific problem for the UTC to address.
    >
    > The current discussion is like arguing about a color that none of the
    > participants have ever seen.
    >
    > MichKa
    >
    >
    >

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Jun 25 2003 - 12:40:11 EDT