W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-mongolian@w3.org > July to September 2015

Re: Searching

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>
Message-ID: <20150804071915.3e2bb872@JRWUBU2>
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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:07:04 UTC