Re: Mongolian NNBSP [I18N-ACTION-458]

On 01.08.2015 03:07, Greg Eck wrote:
> Hi Andrew,
> The case that Badral is referring to is a numeric digit followed by 
> the ordinal suffixes DUGAR/DUEGER and DAQI/DEQI.
> Specifically – a Latin digit OR a Mongolian digit followed by NNBSP 
> followed by one of the four ordinal suffix forms 
> DUGAR/DUEGER/DAQI/DEQI would be considered normal and the sequence 
> should not be broken.
> Here are two examples ...
> <U+0031><U+202F><U+1833><U+1826><U+182D><U+1821><U+1837 >
> <U+0032><U+202F><U+1833><U+1824><U+182D><U+1820><U+1837 >
> Badral, please confirm.
Correct. For complement:
Any mongolian suffix for noun is possible to follow any digits not only 
Arabic. Tibet or Mongolian digits like ᠑, ᠒, [U1810-U1819] etc. also 
Linguistically, Mongolian suffixes are considered not separated from 
word, which means just one word. Visually, the suffixes are joined to 
stem with a small space, in our case NNBSP. So, the suffixes should be 
started everywhere by medial variant.

> Greg
> PS I am attaching a DS05 dealing with all known usages of the NNBSP in 
> Mongolian. The file includes both text strings as well as images. The 
> ordinal section is on page 4.
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Andrew West []
> Sent: Saturday, August 1, 2015 4:12 AM
> To: Badral S. <>
> Cc:
> Subject: Re: Mongolian NNBSP [I18N-ACTION-458]
> On 31 July 2015 at 19:50, Badral S. < 
> <>> wrote:
> >
> >>> What is the context for "Numeric NNBSP Aletter" ? ExtendNumLet would
> >>> inhibit a word break after a numeric, but I think that MidLetter
> >>> would not.
> >
> > Then MidLetter is correct. A word break after a numeric is incorrect.
> I still do not know what the context for this use case is. Is it 
> normal to have "Numeric NNBSP ALetter"? Can you provide an example?
> Andrew

Badral Sanlig, Software architect |
Bolorsoft LLC, Selbe Khotkhon 40/4 D2, District 11, Ulaanbaatar

Received on Saturday, 1 August 2015 07:56:37 UTC