> I quote Angelo Dalli:
>
>>>There
>>>are also problems in distinguishing between the Maltese 'ie' and the
>>>sequence 'i' + 'e' found in words adopted from English.
>
> I interpreted this to mean that he wanted to be able to form two
>different constructs using the same letters, e.g. i + e for an English
loan
>word, but i + ZWJ + e for native Maltese words. This would allow proper
>rendering for both types of words, so that, say "piece" wouldn't be
rendered
>with the "i" and "e" joined. Did I misunderstand?
Angelo mentioned a need to distinguish "ie" in Maltese from "ie" in English
borrowings, but didn't mention much about differences in behaviours - he
only mentioned casing as a particular problem (though I don't see how the
casing works any differently for a single grapheme <ie> than it does for a
grapheme sequence <i><e>).
Angelo: for Maltese words vs. English borrowings in Maltese text, should
there be differences in sorting? in rendering (e.g. ligated "ie" or "gh")?
I mentioned the ZWGJ proposal in my previous message. It's author (Mark
Davis) did update it after UTC #83, and the revised version is available at
http://www.macchiato.com/unicode/GraphemeJoiner.html.
If a difference in collation is needed, ZWGJ would meet that need (if it's
accepted). If it's a difference in rendering - specifically ligation -
that's needed, then the (also proposed and pending) ZW LIGATOR (or ZWNL,
both discussed at UTC#82) would be the thing to use (again, if it's
approved) and not the ZWGJ.
- Peter
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Peter Constable
Non-Roman Script Initiative, SIL International
7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd., Dallas, TX 75236, USA
Tel: +1 972 708 7485
E-mail: <peter_constable@sil.org>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:21:06 EDT