From: Marco Cimarosti (marco.cimarosti@essetre.it)
Date: Mon May 19 2003 - 12:43:01 EDT
This was sent by mistake to the Unicode List Yahoo archive
(unicode@yahoogroups.com).
To join to the *REAL* Unicode List one should go here:
http://www.unicode.org/consortium/distlist.html
_ Marco
________________________________________________________________________
Message: 1
Date: Sat, 17 May 2003 15:31:44 -0000
From: "cibu" <cibu@yahoo.com>
Subject: Re: Malayalam Cillaksharams (was Ya-phalaa)
Hi Michael,
In the Malayalam Cillaksharams context I wanted to ask about the
representation of one more conjuct - 'nta' (as in 'mint'). This
character will look like a '.ra' below cillak.saram of 'na'. As per my
understanding I would encode it as NA + VIRAMA + RRA + VIRAMA + RRA.
But, is this correct?
thanks,
Cibu
--- In unicode@yahoogroups.com, Michael Everson <everson@e...> wrote:
> At 21:14 +0000 2003-03-05, Andy White wrote:
>
> We weren't hiding it. This is part of the improvements to Unicode
> that have been made for 4.0. One of the tasks I was given was to
> improve the block descriptions of the Indic scripts if I could. Most
> have been improved rather a lot considering the time constraints we
> have had. In each case we endeavoured to address some of the problem
> areas. We are still editing.
>
> >>
> >> NA + VIRAMA + MA --> NMA (a single conjunct)
> >> NA + VIRAMA + ZWNJ + MA --> NMA (with a visible virama breve
> >> above and between) NA + VIRAMA + ZWJ + MA --> NMA (with the
> >> cillaks.aram virama curl)
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon May 19 2003 - 13:24:51 EDT