- From: Richard Wordingham <richard.wordingham@ntlworld.com>
- Date: Tue, 4 Aug 2015 07:19:15 +0100
- To: <jrmt@almas.co.jp>
- Cc: <public-i18n-mongolian@w3.org>
On Tue, 4 Aug 2015 12:34:36 +0900 <jrmt@almas.co.jp> wrote: Dear Jirimutu, > I feel the Mongolian encoding is the worst one actually, I agree. Combining poorly correlated appearance and sound results in an overly complicated system. It reminds me of a combined transliteration and transcription scheme for Thai, the 'precise' system. It has almost completely vanished. > but we have no time to re-encode it in the reality. Actually, unusability, lack of support, or lack of use has enabled some large-scale revisions - MYANMAR and NEW TAI LUE are good examples. > II_002.pdf is the examples of some words encoding > possibilities. Maybe the possibilities will decrease after this > discussion forum's conclusion. It's a bit confusing, because it doesn't show the appearances corresponding to the various spellings. I am confused by the encodings for bichiq. Unicode 8.00 only offers two forms for finals for U+182D. I'm also a little confused because QA is U+182C. Richard.
Received on Tuesday, 4 August 2015 06:19:47 UTC