From: Peter Constable (petercon@microsoft.com)
Date: Mon Dec 01 2003 - 14:52:50 EST
> -----Original Message-----
> From: unicode-bounce@unicode.org [mailto:unicode-bounce@unicode.org]
On
> Well, Peter, it's right there on the page.
What page?
> KA with Virama + BA = KWA,
> in Oriya and with Latin transliterations. It's a BA. I swear.
And how do you know it's BA and not a distinct character that comes
after LLA?
> The revisionism would be in deciding that the innovated WA was to be
> used instead of BA. It isn't.
But if there are people in India that think these conjuncts are formed
with WA, then there's an interop problem. I don't personally care which
character is used. I just need to worry about shipping an implementation
that does one thing and having users come back saying it doesn't do what
they expect, or it doesn't interoperate with other implementations they
need to work with.
> Um, I'll hunt them down shortly. Actually I haven't had an
> acknowledgement from the bookstore yet, which I figured I would just
> forward to you when it arrived.
Sounds great. Thanks.
Peter Constable
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Mon Dec 01 2003 - 15:55:39 EST