RE: Mongolian NNBSP [I18N-ACTION-458]

Hi Richard,

>I'm assuming that MSuffix always starts with a letter.  
>There seems to be no need to make Mongolian letters a special type of letter - ALetter suffices.
It is Ok to involve all of the Mongolian Letter into ALetter. Here I have listed is for Specifically point out Mongolian Letter or Mongolian Suffix

> MidLetter doesn't work with (c), nor does MidNumLet.  
> The UTC is offering ExtendNumLet, which will cover all but (e).
Maybe my understanding is wrong when I wrote last mail. If ExtendNumLet covers all but (e), It is Ok.
We can work around (e) in Mongolian. ‍‍‍‍《ᠬᠠᠭᠤᠴᠢᠨ ᠬᠦᠦ》 ᠶᠢᠨ ᠵᠣᠬᠢᠶᠠᠯᠴᠢ will be broken as |《|ᠬᠠᠭᠤᠴᠢᠨ|ᠬᠦᠦ|》|  ᠶᠢᠨ|ᠵᠣᠬᠢᠶᠠᠯᠴᠢ|,  if Nothing covers (e).

>Although it is covered, is (f) suitable for the start of a line?
>I'm not sure that the NNBSP can be rendered properly in such cases.
>Would "ZWJ MSuffix" suffice where "MSuffix" was insufficient?
In some case we will list the NNBSP x MSuffix in the start of a line, for example we are explaining the suffix usage in the text. 
The "ZWJ MSuffix" will not be able to cover "NNBSP MSuffix", because NNBSP have another suffix formatting facility in Mongolian Usage.
It will become "ZWJ NNBSP MSuffix", if we need to use ZWJ to prevent the NNBSP come to start of a line.
But we prefer "NNBSP MSuffix" because when user copy one Suffix to another line to explain the MSuffix, they will not aware to have to input one ZWJ before NNBSP.

>Should NNBSP ever be at the end of a line?  
>If it is given a general category of Pc rather than Zs, it is likely to be displayed.  
>Perhaps this does not matter.
No, In Mongolian there are now NNBSP at the end of a line.

Thanks and Best Regards,

Jirimutu
==========================================================
Almas Inc.
101-0021 601 Nitto-Bldg, 6-15-11, Soto-Kanda, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo
E-Mail: jrmt@almas.co.jp   Mobile : 090-6174-6115
Phone : 03-5688-2081,   Fax : 03-5688-2082
http://www.almas.co.jp/   http://www.compiere-japan.com/
==========================================================



-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Wordingham [mailto:richard.wordingham@ntlworld.com] 
Sent: Saturday, August 1, 2015 5:39 PM
To: public-i18n-mongolian@w3.org
Subject: Re: Mongolian NNBSP [I18N-ACTION-458]

On Sat, 1 Aug 2015 14:44:52 +0900
<jrmt@almas.co.jp> wrote:

(I've changed the quoted email to give the cases letters.)

> 1.     The NNBSP word break property should be changed to MidLetter
> to fit Mongolian Suffix usage.
> 
> (a)  MLetter x NNBSP x MSuffix                   : MLetter ->
> Mongolian Letter, MSuffix -> Mongolian Suffix
> 
> (b)  ALetter x NNBSP x MSuffix                    : ALetter ->
> Alphabet Letter
> 
> (c)  Numeric x NNBSP x MSuffix                  : Numeric (digit and
> Mongolian digit)
> 
> (d) MLetter(Extend|Format) x  NNBSP x MSuffix : Extend | Format -> 
> FVS1-3, ZWNJ, ZWJ etc)
> 
> (e) Some_Punctation x NNBSP x MSuffix   : Some_Punctation like )>]” ‘
> etc.  (If this is not possible to define separately, we can replace it 
> with following isolate Mongolian Suffix)
> 
> (f)  NNBSP x MSuffix                                   : We need to
> support the isolate Mongolian Suffix exist

I'm assuming that MSuffix always starts with a letter.  There seems to be no need to make Mongolian letters a special type of letter - ALetter suffices.

MidLetter doesn't work with (c), nor does MidNumLet.  The UTC is offering ExtendNumLet, which will cover all but (e).

Nothing covers (e).  For example, English "word(s)" is split so that the words are "word" and "s".

Although it is covered, is (f) suitable for the start of a line?
I'm not sure that the NNBSP can be rendered properly in such cases.
Would "ZWJ MSuffix" suffice where "MSuffix" was insufficient?

Should NNBSP ever be at the end of a line?  If it is given a general category of Pc rather than Zs, it is likely to be displayed.  Perhaps this does not matter.

Richard.

Received on Saturday, 1 August 2015 13:40:05 UTC