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

Re: FVS Assignment for A (was: New Thread - FVS Assignment MisMatch)

From: Richard Wordingham <richard.wordingham@ntlworld.com>
Date: Sat, 8 Aug 2015 22:05:46 +0100
To: <jrmt@almas.co.jp>, <public-i18n-mongolian@w3.org>
Message-ID: <20150808220546.59c6dc6a@JRWUBU2>
On Fri, 7 Aug 2015 10:06:46 +0900
<jrmt@almas.co.jp> wrote:

> Here I continue my discussion around the  FVS assignment for U1820-A.

> 1.       I would like to amend one more glyph for f+FVS2. Please refer
> following picture.

Why do you think that the final glyph in
has anything to do with MVS?  It is clearly designed to attach to
another glyph.  It appears to be a form of final A and E used directly
after BA, PA, feminine QA, feminine GA, FA, KA, KHA, and in some of the
other writing systems. You can see it in context at
http://www.studymongolian.net/lessons/basics/writing/ , and both TR170
and the Quejingzhabu's document show examples. If you need to display it
in isolation, it is already doubly encoded - <ZWJ, A, FVS1> and <ZWJ,
E, FVS1>.

Now, there *may* be an issue of whether the selection of connected
final glyph is automatic. I suspect some of the examples at
http://www.studymongolian.net/lessons/basics/writing/ have confused E
and EE.  If there is a need, one could argue that if A/E turns to the
left it is a ligature, and if it turns to the right it is not a
ligature, and so <KA, ZWJ, ZWNJ, ZWJ, E>.  The ZWNJ suppress the
ligature, and the two ZWJs preserve connecting forms.  (I got the
sequence from TUS 7.0.0 Section 23.2 page 803 -
http://www.unicode.org/versions/Unicode7.0.0/ch23.pdf#G22789 .)

Received on Saturday, 8 August 2015 21:39:02 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:07:05 UTC