Re: Tamil 0B83: Tamil Aytham and Devanagari VisargaL

From: Sinnathurai Srivas (sisrivas@blueyonder.co.uk)
Date: Thu Mar 31 2005 - 13:44:54 CST

  • Next message: Philippe Verdy: "Re: Version 4.1 of the Unicode Standard Released"

    Thank you James,

    Thank you for the reply.
    It is insulting Tamil, that is what the description does.
    VisargaL is not Aytham, but Uncode's PRIMARY definition of Aytham is
    VisargaL.
    Developers continue to make mistake and break Unicode implementations.
    Continue to break Unicode implementations.

    Dear UC,

    It is not my intention to write against UC, but I have to write.

    You must speak the truth not otherwise.
    You must clearly state that we made mistake and correcting it and that must
    be the definition of Aytham.
    You must be courageous enough tp own up and then keep the "guarantee of
    stability in the standard" by describing correctly, by describing with
    sincereity.

    For example,
    Do not decsribe Aytham as VisargaL.
    Describe Aytham as "Mistakingly defined as Visarga in the past and is now
    corrected to Aytham"
    Please describe accurately and keep the stability policy to match accuracy.

    How do one write a proposal to amend stability policy?

    Regards
    Sinnathurai Srivas

    >>
    James Kass wrote,

    > TAMIL LETTER VISARGA (U+0B83)

    Of course, I should have typed "TAMIL SIGN VISARGA".

    > It is because of a guarantee of stability in the standard. Once a
    > character has been named, the name should never be changed.

    And, I should have indicated that the name should never be changed
    after it has been officially published as part of the standard. That's
    one good reason why proposed additions take a while to get included --
    there's a review period for the public to catch mistakes. Catching
    mistakes before publishing is always nice...

    Best regards,

    James Kass

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "James Kass" <jameskass@att.net>
    To: "Avarangal" <avarangal@hotmail.com>; <unicode@unicode.org>
    Sent: Thursday, March 31, 2005 11:15 AM
    Subject: Re: Tamil 0B83: Tamil Aytham and Devanagari VisargaL

    >
    > Sinnathurai Srivas asks:
    >
    >> My question is
    >>
    >> 1/ What is the definition of Visarga
    >
    > TAMIL LETTER VISARGA (U+0B83) has the same character properties as
    > TAMIL LETTER KA (U+0B95). Both are "Lo" (Letter Other) and both have
    > combining class zero. In the notes which are in the detail associated
    > with the Unicode character charts, TAMIL LETTER VISARGA is given an
    > alias of "aytham" - which means the standard considers the character
    > named TAMIL LETTER VISARGA to be the Tamil aytham.
    >
    > The DEVANAGARI SIGN VISARGA, in contrast, is not classed as "Lo", but
    > rather it is classed as "Mc" (Mark, spacing combining).
    >
    >> 2/ Why Aytham is still called VisargaL?
    >
    > It is because of a guarantee of stability in the standard. Once a
    > character has been named, the name should never be changed. There are
    > a few mistakes which are in the standard and can't be fixed. One of the
    > most well-known mistakes concerns a Gothic script letter, the name in the
    > standard actually has a typographical error.
    >
    >> 3/ Do I need to write about the definition of Aytham and how it may not
    >> be
    >> VisargaL at all.
    >
    > If some applications still treat aytham as a combining character instead
    > of
    > a spacing character, then it might be necessary to contact the designers
    > of
    > the specific applications. Sometimes updates are slow.
    >
    > Best regards,
    >
    > James Kass
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Mar 31 2005 - 13:45:56 CST