RE: FVS Assignment for A - Word-final A

Hi Richard,

The leftward swept glyph is an orkhitz which roughly translated is "leash". This could be the disconnected or the connected leftward swept glyph.
The right-ward swept glyph is called suul which means "tail" and as you would guess the Mongol is thinking of a horse tail.

Regarding the mention of a mandate, I was referring to a statement Professor Quejingzhabu made once where he said that all glyphs should be available to the end user - to print, to view. In general I am in agreement with this. However, it does not have to be a hard and fast "rule". Such a "rule" will always be broken. Case in point in Mongolian is where a given digit or punctuation item goes vertical. There is no need to make the vertical glyph available to the horizontal script screen. In general, however, my feeling is that if a glyph is in print, then the end user usually should be able to access it - if for no other reason than to discuss it in a research paper.

The current specification shows its strength in this area in that all of the ~1200+ registered ligatures can be individually manipulated with use of the ZWJ and FVS set.

Greg


-----Original Message-----
From: Richard Wordingham [mailto:richard.wordingham@ntlworld.com] 
Sent: Sunday, August 9, 2015 9:27 PM
To: Greg Eck <greck@postone.net>; public-i18n-mongolian@w3.org
Subject: Re: FVS Assignment for A - Word-final A

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 Monday, 10 August 2015 03:12:32 UTC