From: Kenneth Whistler (kenw@sybase.com)
Date: Tue Feb 24 2004 - 15:11:21 EST
> > Another alternative which should be considered is use of a variation
> > selector.
>
> None of the stakeholders on this issue has suggested that option, and I
> suspect would reject it outright. There is no need to introduce a
> variation selector; it would constitute yet another innovation in the
> Indic model and would only lead to more confusion.
I agree with Peter (C, not K) here. The problem with an
approach using variation selectors is twofold. As Peter
Constable says, it would constitute another innovation for
controlling forms in Indic processing, introducing the
possibility for more confusion and mismatch in implementations.
Even worse, however, is that variation selectors are intended
to be ignorable without serious distortion of the impact on
text interpretation. The typical cases of variation selection
for math symbols just picks out a glyph preference between
what are otherwise freely interchangeable forms. But in
the case of khanda-ta we have a fixed orthographic form that
is correct in some circumstances and incorrect in others, at
least by all accounts I've been hearing. It is such situations
that have typically used ZWJ and ZWNJ in Indic scripts to
control required forms.
Think of variation selection as being more appropriate when
what we are talking about are for most purposes simply
*free variants* for presentation -- either is equally correct
to most people under most circumstances -- but where for
particular presentation purposes someone wishes to choose
out a precise variant and have indication of that usage
reside in the text stream itself. (And even then, this is
only used in extreme circumstances when failure to have such
a mechanism available is causing a mapping problem or similar
issue which threatens to become a character *encoding* problem
for the committees.)
--Ken
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Feb 24 2004 - 15:59:25 EST