On Fri, 09 Nov 2001 Marco Cimarosti wrote :
>Actually, Gaspar's idea of encoding half letters (and forming full letters
>by adding a danda) is *not* intrinsically worse than ISCII/Unicode idea of
>encoding full letters (and forming half letters by adding a halant).
>
>But the fact is that it is not even better: it is just *equivalent*!
>
>So, of course, there is no reason to throw away 10 years work just because
>one likes it better the other way round...
Absolutely true. Also it is the way the specific scripts are initially
taught on which character sets would also depend.
>1: ra + halant + ZWJ
>Solution 1 is the cleanest one, of course: a repha glyph is what this
>sequence should have been on the first place, and the eyelash ra glyph is
>still available with ra + nukta. However, this may be incompatible with
>existing applications and fonts.
That is what we could go for. When looking back at ISCII though, the
introduction of the INV character for enforcing standalone half characters
and repha forms itself, created a problem for data sorting etc. Do you think
that the multiple Zero Width Joiners and/or multiple Viramas would create
similiar problems?
Dhrubajyoti Banerjee
_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Sat Nov 10 2001 - 17:00:00 EST