W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-core@w3.org > January to March 2008

RE: [UAX29] i18n comment 6: Indic scripts or Tamil?

From: Richard Ishida <ishida@w3.org>
Date: Fri, 7 Mar 2008 14:16:35 -0000
To: <public-i18n-core@w3.org>
Message-ID: <005d01c8805d$da348cd0$8e9da670$@org>

With additional clarity elsewhere in the text and the small edit here, I'd
say this is Fixed.

RI

============
Richard Ishida
Internationalization Lead
W3C (World Wide Web Consortium)
 
http://www.w3.org/International/
http://rishida.net/blog/
http://rishida.net/

 

> -----Original Message-----
> From: public-i18n-core-request@w3.org [mailto:public-i18n-core-
> request@w3.org] On Behalf Of ishida@w3.org
> Sent: 07 March 2008 11:33
> To: public-i18n-core@w3.org
> Subject: [UAX29] i18n comment 6: Indic scripts or Tamil?
> 
> 
> Comment from the i18n review of:
> http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr29/tr29-12.html
> 
> Comment 6
> At http://www.w3.org/International/reviews/0801-uax29/
> Editorial/substantive: E/S?
> Tracked by: RI
> 
> Location in reviewed document:
> 
> 3 [http://www.unicode.org/reports/tr29/tr29-
> 12.html#Grapheme_Cluster_Boundaries]
> 
> Comment:
> 'Indic scripts such as Tamil'
>  is ambiguous.
> 
> 
> We were expecting to read something like 'Indic scripts, such as the Tamil
> we saw earlier' or 'most Indic scripts'.
> 
> 
> On the other hand, this may be intentional because the XDGCs are intended
> to only address the needs of a simpler Indic script like Tamil that
> doesn't generally use conjunct forms (so the statement should say
> something more like "the set of Indic scripts that are like Tamil").
> 
> 
> If this latter interpretation is true, a. there needs to be a clearer
> statement about the relevance of XDGCs to Indic and South-East Asian
> scripts in general, and b. we think the document is definitely setting its
> sights too low.
> 
> 
Received on Friday, 7 March 2008 14:13:20 GMT

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.2.0+W3C-0.50 : Wednesday, 1 October 2008 10:18:53 GMT