From: Javier SOLA (lists@khmeros.info)
Date: Sun Dec 30 2007 - 21:07:19 CST
Michael,
Is this proposal for both Cambodian and Vietnamese Cham? Are the
differences only a matter of font style?
Javier
James Kass wrote
>
> Cham sample electronic texts
>
> Are there any?
>
> I've tried to enter Unicode Cham based on exhibits in the proposal
> N3120.PDF, but I'm a bit confused. Any pointers or links would
> be appreciated. My main Cham confusion right now relates to
> the difference between:
> AA2E ◌ꨮ CHAM VOWEL SIGN OE
> and
> AA43 ◌ꩃ CHAM CONSONANT SIGN FINAL NG
> ... and how both of these marks stack with relation to other marks
> (and each other).
>
> N3120 from Figure 4
> http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/n3120.pdf
> (entered in visual order, as reordering isn't yet supported...)
> -.ꨦꨄ ꨤꨪꨝꨭꩍ ꨀꨕꨬ ꨥꨮꩍ
> ꨟꨢꩍ ꨟꨬ ꨤꨪꨗꨮꨲ ꨴꨈꨭꩀ ꨔꨮ
> ꨟ ꨴꨈꨩꨭ ꨔꨮꨱ ꨂꨣꨮ ꨰꨨ ꨎꨪꩍꨕꨤꩍ
> (Graphic attached shows the section from the PDF along with
> the display of the above text on my system.)
>
> The first obvious question is -- which dash-dot Unicode sequence
> should be used to electronically represent the dash-dot at the
> beginning of this short bit of Cham text?
>
> The second obvious question is -- which of those glyphs should
> be U+AA2E and which should be U+AA43?
>
> The third obvious question is -- when will font engines support
> complex script handling for Cham?
>
> The Omniglot Cham exhibit
> http://www.omniglot.com/writing/cham.htm
> shows a word transliterated as "pajưng" in the first line. Am
> I correct in guessing that the long, uprising line is the vowel
> mark and that the shorter line which looks a bit like a breve
> is the final consonant glyph? And, what is the preferred
> encoding order for that sequence?
>
> Should it be ...
> AA1A ꨚ CHAM LETTER PA
> AA0E ꨎ CHAM LETTER JA
> AA33 ◌ꨳ CHAM CONSONANT SIGN YA
> AA2E ◌ꨮ CHAM VOWEL SIGN OE
> AA43 ◌ꩃ CHAM CONSONANT SIGN FINAL NG
>
> ꨚꨎꨳꨮꩃ ... ?
>
> Best regards,
>
> James Kass
>
>
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun Dec 30 2007 - 21:07:16 CST