RE: Writing Tatar using the Latin script; new characters to encode?

From: Peter Constable (petercon@microsoft.com)
Date: Wed May 12 2004 - 11:03:14 CDT

  • Next message: Philippe Verdy: "Re: Script vs Writing System"

    >>2. The case pair for barred o is encoded (U+019F and U+0275), and it
    seems that their confusion comes from less-than-perfect but annotated
    name for U+019F, and from the usage remark "African". Can we
    authoritatively tell them that those two characters are the ones they
    want?

    IMO, yes.

    >>Can we add a "Tatar" usage remark to both?

    That can certainly be done (assuming the info on Tatar is correct), and
    may be helpful.

    >>3. The case pair n with descender is definitely not encoded, and from
    my
    memory of the discussion of ghe with descender, we would want to encode
    them as separate characters (rather than with combining descenders on
    "n").

    Yes.

    >>Is anybody working on that proposal?

    The ghe with descender is already approved by UTC and in the PDAM for
    amendement 1.

    If you look in the documentation on SIL's usage of the PUA
    (http://scripts.sil.org/cms/scripts/page.php?site_id=nrsi&cat_id=Unicode
    PUA) you'll find that I had been given evidence for Latin H/h with
    descender in Judeo-Tat (not related to Tatar). I had anticipated
    preparing a proposal for that and the other orthographic characters in
    SIL's PUA usage, but have not yet had opportunity to do so. The
    n-descender was not among the thing that were added to SIL's PUA usage,
    though.

    Peter
     
    Peter Constable
    Globalization Infrastructure and Font Technologies
    Microsoft Windows Division

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed May 12 2004 - 11:04:49 CDT