- From: Badral S. <badral@bolorsoft.com>
- Date: Thu, 02 Jul 2015 08:20:06 +0200
- To: public-i18n-mongolian@w3.org
- Message-ID: <5594D816.1080700@bolorsoft.com>
Hi Greg Eck, We (our team + Tugstuguldur) implemented Mongolian engine for Harfbuzz. The responsible person is Mr. Bahded. I will contact you again, because just now I am on the trip to Mongolia. Badral On 02.07.2015 02:58, Greg Eck wrote: > > Does anyone have contact with a Harfbuzz engineer that can give us an > understanding on how Harfbuzz handles the character immediately > preceeding the MVS/NNBSP? > > Greg > > *From:* Greg Eck > *Sent:* Tuesday, June 30, 2015 12:46 AM > *To:* 'public-i18n-mongolian@w3.org' > *Subject:* NNBSP-MVS Impact > > With reference to > http://r12a.github.io/scripts/mongolian/variants.html > <http://r12a.github.io/scripts/mongolian/variants.html> > > As we start the discussion of Mongolian variants, I think it is > > important to look at the means of implementing the NNBSP and the MVS > > first. There is considerable variation here. If we can understand how > > each font implements these two areas, it may bring understanding of > > why our fonts differ in shaping in these two contexts. I am presenting > > two documents for discussion dealing with the NNBSP and the MVS model. > > **If we could have a description of how Harfbuzz, Apple and other * > > *rendering engines interpret the character preceding/following the * > > *NNBSP/MVS that would be helpful.** These descriptions will be added > > into the NOTES section of each chart. The attached chart shows the > > model used in the Microsoft Universal Shaping Engine. > > Once we have agreed upon the two models, we will start with > > The U+1820-A (initial/medial )and then proceed to the > > other five similarly affected code-points U+1828 (medial/final), U+182C > > (medial/final), U+182D (medial/final), U+1835 (medial/final), U+1836 > > (medial/final). A premise that I start with is that “Mongolian font > > implementation does not always follow grammatical rules” – case in > > point is the U+182C final which is not grammatical, but seems to be the > > implementation of choice for two glyphs in most of the fonts on display. > > Greg > -- Badral Sanlig, Software architect www.bolorsoft.com | www.badral.net Bolorsoft LLC, Selbe Khotkhon 40/4 D2, District 11, Ulaanbaatar
Received on Sunday, 5 July 2015 16:13:28 UTC