Re: [indic] Re: Feedback on PR-104

From: Sinnathurai Srivas (sisrivas@blueyonder.co.uk)
Date: Sat Sep 08 2007 - 14:21:38 CDT

  • Next message: Asmus Freytag: "Re: Some control characters test cases"

    X and KSH Images can be found at
    http://www.geocities.com/sisrivas/kanini/unicode/proposal/x-ksh/x-ksh.jpg

    http://www.geocities.com/sisrivas/kanini/unicode/proposal/x-ksh/proposal-x-ksh.html

    Sinnathurai

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Sinnathurai Srivas" <sisrivas@blueyonder.co.uk>
    To: "Mahesh T. Pai" <paivakil@gmail.com>; "Unicode Mailing List"
    <unicode@unicode.org>; <indic@unicode.org>
    Sent: 08 September 2007 08:47
    Subject: Re: [indic] Re: Feedback on PR-104

    > I'll arrange for uploading some images.
    > Yes, there is X form and ksh form.
    > The ksh form can be treated as conjunct equivalant, similar to PR, TR etc
    > are treated conjunct equivalant.
    >
    > Engineers can find work around to all pitfalls found in Unicode. But what
    > should be done is eliminate pitfalls in Unicode, that is the duty of UC.
    >
    > In English there is no ZWJ or ZWNJ. That is a duty performed well by UC.
    > Infact VV is an example of discrimination by UC. If VV can be made single
    > character, why X is not made single character in Tamil. Is it to make
    > Tamil a nonTamil line tower?
    > There is no conjunct in Tamil. Why UC and Microsoft insisting on changing
    > Tamil.
    >
    > Sinnathurai
    >
    > ----- Original Message -----
    > From: "Mahesh T. Pai" <paivakil@gmail.com>
    > To: "Unicode Mailing List" <unicode@unicode.org>; <indic@unicode.org>
    > Sent: 08 September 2007 06:49
    > Subject: Re: [indic] Re: Feedback on PR-104
    >
    >
    >> Peter Constable said on Fri, Sep 07, 2007 at 11:24:58AM -0700,:
    >>
    >> > The mail I received is illegible: I cannot tall at all who is
    >> > saying what.
    >>
    >> I think the subject can be ignored till somebody comes up with images
    >> of a written representation.
    >>
    >> All I that I can make out right now is that there are two
    >> representations of the Tamil ksh conjunct in the _English_ script and
    >> both such representations deserve separate treatment in _Tamil_
    >>
    >>
    >> --
    >> Mahesh T. Pai <<>> http://paivakil.blogspot.com/
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Sep 08 2007 - 14:25:41 CDT