Re: Sindhi characters proposed

From: Patrick Andries (patrick.andries@xcential.com)
Date: Mon Apr 04 2005 - 06:11:45 CST

  • Next message: Patrick Andries: "Re: [ATypI] IJ"
    Peter Constable a écrit : 
    From: unicore-bounce@unicode.org [mailto:unicore-bounce@unicode.org]
    
    On
  
    Behalf Of Patrick Andries
    
    

  
    If the mark of implosivity were encoded as separate, then yes, you'd
have to have to do extra work to get the fused forms.
      
    [PA] Given what the Devanagari rendering engines already do
    
    (conjuncts,
  
    virama, handling of ra), this may not be such a problem if they were
benefits to encoding a productive separate combining mark.
    
    
There are no real benefits from encoding a separate combining mark, and
I can assure you that the cost to implementations in dealing with the
issues a combining mark would raise would not be trivial.
    All we wanted to know is that there were no other potential implosives unknown to us, this was not mentioned in the proposal.

    It was not said either clear from the proposal what these non trivial implementatons issues would be (we still don't know, but since there is little probability of other implosive appearing, we'll trust you ;-)).

    Please, just encode four new characters.
    Okay, given the additional explanation (the alternative is not productive, the set of implosives is very small).

    P. A.

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Apr 04 2005 - 06:12:52 CST