Re: Alternative encodings for Malayalam “nta”
Cibu via Unicode
unicode at unicode.org
Thu Oct 10 11:37:12 CDT 2019
> Oh the Core Spec’s 5.0 -> 5.1 delta is presented on the webpage itself,
> but not incorporated into the PDF:
Thanks for pointing this out. I had missed it.
> Here is the difference between our approaches. You probably are trying to
> say that <NA, VIRAMA, RRA> is a valid sequence and hence the requirement of
> being non-conflicting with the rest. I am not recommending that. I just
> wanted to document the fact there is significant usage of <NA, VIRAMA, RRA>
> for stacked ൻ്റ and <NA, VIRAMA, ZWJ, RRA>, to a lesser degree. Fonts may
> or may not resolve the conflict of <NA, VIRAMA, ZWJ, RRA> sequence.
> However, higher level systems may be able to resolve it by additional
> context information. We should also continue to specify that <CHILLU N,
> VIRAMA, RRA> is the standard sequence to help the input methods and other
> normalisation logic.
> Right, I see. This aligns with the comments I received at the plenary
> discussion too. Gonna include both unideal encodings in a piece of proposed
> Core Spec edit, in a revised document.
So I assume the plan is to include this in the Core Spec edits along with
the planned ones corresponding to L2/19-086R (chillu conjuncts) and
L2/18-346 (general historical characters). Please keep me posted. Thanks!
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the Unicode