- From: Richard Wordingham <richard.wordingham@ntlworld.com>
- Date: Sun, 9 Aug 2015 14:27:10 +0100
- To: Greg Eck <greck@postone.net>, "public-i18n-mongolian@w3.org" <public-i18n-mongolian@w3.org>
On Fri, 7 Aug 2015 13:32:25 +0000 Greg Eck <greck@postone.net> wrote: > Item#1 - new glyph needed > > > It appears to me that this is a stylistic type of thing not demanding > a new glyph nor FVS assignment. What you want it would seem is a > means to talk about the orkhitz A/E while it is connected to a > root/stem. What is 'orkhitz A/E'? Is it the disconnected glyph or is it A/E with a flourish to the left? > Some styles will handle this fine without the MVS such as > the image I sent earlier from Baiti. The font Jirimutu used designed > the orkhitz with space at the top evidently. Other fonts such as > Baiti expect the MVS to provide the space. Beyond that, and I am not > being critical, this font has an attractive appearance I think, the > orkhitz glyph is not designed to join the stem - there is nothing > wrong with that - it is merely a design decision. > You could say that > the solution is just to add the new glyph to the font repertoire and > substitute it for the default in the absence of an MVS. That would > probably work, but you would not meet the Quejingzhabu mandate #1 > which says that all glyphs must be under control - you must be able > to print/control in a standalone environment. What precisely is this mandate #1? In the Quejingzhabu scheme this glyph is part of certain ligatures related to <BA, A> and <QA, E>. Now, unless one is required to use exactly the same glyph set or support a particular usage of the PUA, a font using the character for these syllables could be compliant with the tables once the sequences of Unicode characters were converted to Unicode. Richard.
Received on Sunday, 9 August 2015 13:27:48 UTC