From: Ngwe Tun (ngwestar@gmail.com)
Date: Sat Mar 25 2006 - 10:28:29 CST
Dear Richard,
sorry for repost
On 3/25/06, Richard Wordingham <richard.wordingham@ntlworld.com> wrote:
>
> Kenneth Whistler wrote:
>
> Subject: Re: AA versus TALL AA (Was: the Myanmar thread from h e double
> hockeysticks)
>
> Is this a Unicore escape?
>
> >> Scenario 1
> >>
> >> This results from Everson's advocated solution, disunifying
> >> based on glyph shape.
> >>
> >> Encoding Rendering rule Reading rule
> >>
> >> Burmese: xa yA a --> {a} {a} --> a
> >> a --> {A} {A} --> A
> >>
> >> S'gaw Karen: xA yA a --> {A} {A} --> A
> >
> > Sorry, to beat you all to the punch, recte:
> >
> > Scenario 1
> >
> > This results from Everson's advocated solution, disunifying
> > based on glyph shape.
> >
> > Encoding Rendering rule Reading rule
> >
> > Burmese: xa yA a --> {a} {a} --> a
> > A --> {A} {A} --> A
> >
> > S'gaw Karen: xA yA A --> {A} {A} --> A
>
> Aren't the reading rules more like '{a} --> A and {A} --> A'?
>
> For Burmese, isn't this akin to using undotted 'i' (U+0131) in the English
> word 'fish' because good typography leaves it ligated and undotted? The
> motivation for the tall form in Burmese seems to be to distinguish
> consonant
> plus vowel from another consonant. Thus, under Scenario 1, one would
> encounter:
Yes, We are using TALL AA while It is need to be distinguish TA and
WA+Vowel AA
We are expressing TALL AA using at
http://www.mcf.org.mm/unicode/rendering/v_aa.htm
Burmese: Encoding: wa Rendering: wa Reading: t@ ...aa wa! (or
> something similar!) as opposed to the current Unicode:
>
> Encoding: wa Rendering: wA Reading: wa
>
> One question that was not considered worthy of consideration in the
> proposal
> ( http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/n3043.pdf ) was how accurately the
> Burmese actually select the correct form when typing (or indeed, when
> writing by hand). I guess that one reason for Sgaw Karen dropping the
> round
> form was that it was simpler to teach a single glyph shape.
In Burmese, We need to add vowel tall AA after *KHA, GA, NGA, DA, PA and WA
consonants.
*
Even in burmese bible,
http://ngwestar.googlepages.com/pha_tall_AA.jpg/pha_tall_AA-full.jpg, they
broke the rules, Vowel TALL AA follows the consonants PHA.And We have a lot
of others rules broke examples. And Ins Sgaw Karen, they are using Vowel
TALL AA follows every base consonants. So, They don't need to distinguish
above problems.
Moving slightly eastwards, the decision here sets a precedent for the Lanna
> script. My Lanna text book seems quite sloppy in its choice. The
> practical
> rules may also be quite complex, though I stopped worrying when I was
> advised that a solution using variation selectors could leave the glyph
> choice in their absence to the application. Medial RA and subscripts with
>
> ascenders on the preceding consonant seem to inhibit tall AA, but it seems
> very much to be a matter of style and aesthetics in the Lanna script.
Sure, very complicated rules to render tall AA or normal AA. you may see
some example in above URL.some time KHA or NGA base consonants combined,
that may follows vowel AA, not TALL AA.
I suppose the best precedent for having two characters is the distinction
> between U+017F (Latin small letter long s) and U+0073 (Latin small letter
> s). However, I recall that distinction being justified by the selection
> being neither easily algorithmically determinable nor stable over time.
>
> Richard.
We have an another issues; If we justified with algorithm in rendering
engine.
Some time we have to write grammer lesson. NGA + Vowel AA is an illegal
sequence for burmese writing. But Rendering engine will render with NGA +
Vowel TALL AA only. How can we do it? So I agreed that adding Vowel TALL AA
in Myanmar Block.
Regards
Ngwe Tun
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Mar 25 2006 - 10:29:58 CST
