Re: Non-standard Tibetan stacks

U+034F seems like a reasonable solution to prevent re-ordering.

However we will probably need to include a way to key this character
on Tibetan and Bhutanese keyboards - and find a way of explaining, in
simple terms, to users why (and when) they need to insert this
character.

Look-up tables in Tibetan fonts would also need updating

- C

On 18/08/2011, Richard Wordingham <richard.wordingham_at_ntlworld.com> wrote:
> On Tue, 16 Aug 2011 23:32:51 +0100
> Andrew West <andrewcwest_at_gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Chris Fynn asked about certain non-standard stacks he was trying to
>> implement in the Tibetan Machine Uni font in an email to the Tibex
>> list on 2006-12-09, but these didn't involve multiple consonant-vowel
>> sequences (one stack sequence was <0F43 0FB1 0FB1 0FB2 0FB2 0F74 0F74
>> 0F71> which would be reordered to <0F42 0FB7 0FB1 0FB1 0FB2 0FB2 0F71
>> 0F74 0F74> by normalization which would display differently).
>
> Isn't the position now that the correct encoding would be <0F43 0FB1
> 0FB1 0FB2 0FB2 0F74 0F74 034F 0F71>? If U+034F can prevent the
> misordering of hiriq and patah in Hebrew (TUS Version 6.0 Section
> 16.2), then it should be able to sort out the ordering of Tibetan
> vowels. What does this stack abbreviate?
>
> I think U+034F is also the answer to distinguishing Tibetan <C,
> I, U> and <C, U, I> abbreviations of <C, I, C, U> and <C, U, C, I> -
> distinguish them as <C, I, U> and <C, U, U+034F, I>.
>
> Richard.
>
>
Received on Fri Sep 02 2011 - 23:01:49 CDT