On Thu, 8 Nov 2001, Arjun Aggarwal wrote:
> Hello everybody
>
>
> On Wed, 7 Nov 2001, Philipp Reichmuth wrote
> > I've been wondering a little bit recently about the definition of
> > "character" vs. "glyph variant" that is applied during decision
> > whether or not a given proposed character should go into Unicode.
>
> If anybody on the list really thinks that they can submit any characters
> into Unicode then they should positively respond to my query. Help in
> this regard is much needed.
> [snip]
> With Regards
> Arjun Aggarwal
> mrasool@sancharnet.in
>
>
Friday, November 9, 2001
Dear Arjun Aggarwal,
I have had some limited success with adding characters to the Unicode
character repertoire.
1. On page 390, at U+06FE, the Sindhi character was added at my
request. With the request I supplied photocopies of several title pages
on which the character appeared. Appendix B, page 963-965 discusses the
process to request an addition.
2. On page 218, at R5, this isn't a new character, but another way to
encode one was added (R5a is the older text.) This involved reference to
the relevant part of ISCII.
3. Without success I have been trying to get added an alternative way of
encoding the "so-called conjunct" discussed on page 214 at figure 9-3 (4).
I believe instead of U+0930, U+094D, U+090B (i.e. RA, halant and
independent RI vowel) this should be encoded as just U+094D, U+0943 (RA
and RI matra). It is a consonant with a vowel matra which has an
exceptional glyph representation that rendering software could be made to
deal with. ISCII is silent about this, probably because it is uncommon
(see Monier Williams' Sanskrit English dictionary, page 554, column 2,
"nirri" etc.). If you could get anyone from the Bureau of Indian Standards
who maintains ISCII or the Indian Ministry of Information Technology who
is a Unicode member to state in writing how ISCII would handle this it
might help.
As per my earlier note quoting an article by several Indian authors,
I am not persuaded that the kind of changes you seem to want are needed.
ISCII and Unicode adopted phoneitc based encoding for Indian scripts. You
seem to favor a graphic/glyphic based approach. Would you have the "i
matra" (U+093F) precede or follow the consonant it modifies? Preceding is
graphically easier but makes sorting difficult. No solution can make
everything easy.
Regards,
Jim Agenbroad ( jage@LOC.gov )
The above are purely personal opinions, not necessarily the official
views of any government or any agency of any.
Phone: 202 707-9612; Fax: 202 707-0955; US mail: I.T.S. Dev.Gp.4, Library
of Congress, 101 Independence Ave. SE, Washington, D.C. 20540-9334 U.S.A.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Fri Nov 09 2001 - 16:47:50 EST