Re: Major Defect in Combining Classes of Tibetan Vowels

From: Peter_Constable@sil.org
Date: Thu Jun 26 2003 - 03:43:05 EDT

  • Next message: Peter_Constable@sil.org: "Re: Major Defect in Combining Classes of Tibetan Vowels"

    John Cowan wrote on 06/25/2003 03:15:21 PM:

    > I don't understand how the current implementation "breaks BH text".
    > At worst, normalization may put various combining marks in a
    non-traditional
    > order, but all alternative orders are canonically equivalent anyway, and
    > no (ordinary) Unicode process should depend on any specific order.

    No, John, there are distinctions in Biblical Hebrew related to ordering,
    but due to the canonical combining classes these distinctions are all
    neutralized under canonical ordering / normalization. The alternate orders
    are canonically equivalent, but should not have been so.

    - Peter

    ---------------------------------------------------------------------------
    Peter Constable

    Non-Roman Script Initiative, SIL International
    7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd., Dallas, TX 75236, USA
    Tel: +1 972 708 7485

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jun 26 2003 - 04:33:05 EDT