From: Andrew West (andrewcwest@gmail.com)
Date: Tue Oct 18 2005 - 06:34:30 CST
On 17/10/05, Kenneth Whistler <kenw@sybase.com> wrote:
>
> Someone please do the research and submit a document to the UTC
> with a detailed demonstration that some names for Lao and Thai
> are out of whack (if they are). At that point, the UTC and WG2
> can make determinations that some annotations to that effect
> may be added to the standards to clarify the issue. And we can
> add them to the growing list of character names with one problem
> or another.
>
I certainly don't believe that just because someone I don't know and
have never previously heard of claims that a couple of Lao names are
wrong that this is necessarily the case. I was simply hoping that
someone on this list with expertise in Lao would be able to confirm or
deny the truth of what this person says. Obviously any demands for
immediate action to rectify this "mistake" are, to put it mildly,
premature.
According to the Unicode Standard, the Lao block is based on the Thao
IT Standard TIS 620-2529. The only copy of this standard that I have
been able to find is the code chart in Figure 1 at
<http://www.cicc.or.jp/english/hyoujyunka/af04/4-15.html>. This shows
Thai glyphs and Thai names, corresponding to the Unicode Thai glyphs
and names, but it does not show the Lao glyphs or names. As it is a
Thai standard, I wonder whether it ever defined Lao glyphs/names at
all, or whether Lao characters were simply mapped to their
corresponding Thai characters, in which case I wonder where the
Unicode Lao names come from. If anyone can point me to a pre-Unicode
atandard that defines the Lao glyphs and names, that would be helpful.
Andrew
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Oct 18 2005 - 06:37:08 CST