From: Andries Brouwer (aebr@win.tue.nl)
Date: Tue Aug 29 2006 - 16:21:44 CDT
On Tue, Aug 29, 2006 at 12:31:56PM -0700, John Hudson wrote:
> Andries Brouwer wrote:
>
>> If you agree that I represent the glyph-choosing rules correctly,
>> then you must conclude that U+06BE is incorrect for Uyghur,
>
> I don't agree that you represent the glyph-choosing rules for Uighur
> correctly. My colleagues and I examined dozens of Uighur publications and
...
> native Uighur experts
...
> Thomas Milo
...
> Microsoft
...
1) Killed by invocation of authorities. Well, OK, so you disagree.
Can you be more precise and say with precisely what you disagree?
What is it these authorities say?
As stated, my main interest today is in Kurdish, but nevertheless,
now that you brought up Uyghur, I am interested in what you think
the current usage is. I wrote
> Position: Isol Init Med Final
> Kurdish H: init init med init
> Uyghur H: init init med med
that Uyghur H uses two shapes: "initial Heh" in isolated and
initial position, and "medial Heh" in medial and final position.
How would you describe current Uyghur H shaping?
2) You were silent about the Kurdish part. Do you have an opinion
about the correct treatment of Kurdish H?
Andries
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Aug 29 2006 - 16:23:13 CDT