Re: Emailing: Isolate Comparision between fonts.docx

Hi,
As Report 170 we need to take initial one if no isolated form of the 
letter exists. On the other hand, if there multiple isolated forms 
exist, we need to take distinguished one. That's the reason why we 
implemented isolated OE/UE as cid:image008.jpg@01D0F843.DC45E5D0 .
There exists probably no textbook for teaching as Jirimutu proposed. 
Every three forms (init, midi, fina) must not be separated from the 
letter so it always teached and represented by the three forms. I am 
pretty sure, almost nobody (Mongolian who knows Mongolian script) heard 
about isolated forms. The significance of the isolated form is as 
minimal. For initial of Names we use always the initial one.
That's also the reason, why we don't know explicit about isolated forms. 
Thus, I think we should accept distinguished forms rather than 
ambiguated forms. IMHO, it is rather meaningful.

Badral

On 27.09.2015 12:08, Greg Eck wrote:
>
> Jirimutu,
>
> Yes, if you could send the group some textbook images showing the 
> teaching of the 
> cid:image005.jpg@01D0F843.DC45E5D0cid:image005.jpg@01D0F843.DC45E5D0cid:image007.jpg@01D0F843.DC45E5D0cid:image007.jpg@01D0F843.DC45E5D0, 
> that would be helpful.
>
> If we look at the Todo, we find the FangZhen font has one difference. 
> I am asking the Fangzhen engineer to comment on this now also.
>
> But, can you tell us why the White font uses the initial in U+184F and 
> U+1859? Why would you say that this this correct – especially in light 
> of the other fonts’ shaping differences?
>
> Greg
>
> >>>>>
>
> ·What do we print on a keyboard for these four letters? I would think 
> it would be 
> cid:image005.jpg@01D0F843.DC45E5D0cid:image006.jpg@01D0F843.DC45E5D0cid:image007.jpg@01D0F843.DC45E5D0cid:image008.jpg@01D0F843.DC45E5D0. 
>
>
> Yes, for identification.
>
> ·What shaping do you get for the sequence 
> <U+1823><SPACE><U+1824><SPACE><U+1825><SPACE><U+1826>? If we give the 
> shaping as be 
> cid:image005.jpg@01D0F843.DC45E5D0cid:image005.jpg@01D0F843.DC45E5D0cid:image007.jpg@01D0F843.DC45E5D0cid:image007.jpg@01D0F843.DC45E5D0how 
> do we answer the pupil when he/she asks why there is a difference?
>
> It is the true, we are all teaching pupil in this way until now.
>
> ·When we are teaching the alphabet in the classroom, do we teach 
> cid:image005.jpg@01D0F85E.F3909EE0cid:image006.jpg@01D0F85E.F3909EE0cid:image007.jpg@01D0F85E.F3909EE0cid:image005.jpg@01D0F843.DC45E5D0cid:image005.jpg@01D0F843.DC45E5D0cid:image007.jpg@01D0F843.DC45E5D0cid:image007.jpg@01D0F843.DC45E5D0 or 
> cid:image005.jpg@01D0F85E.F3909EE0cid:image006.jpg@01D0F85E.F3909EE0cid:image007.jpg@01D0F85E.F3909EE0cid:image005.jpg@01D0F843.DC45E5D0cid:image006.jpg@01D0F843.DC45E5D0cid:image007.jpg@01D0F843.DC45E5D0cid:image008.jpg@01D0F843.DC45E5D0? 
>
>
> It is the first group. We can provide some text book copy next week.
>
> ·It would seem very strange to be giving instruction where you are 
> teaching two different letters with exactly the same form.
>
> Yes, it is. But it is the Traditional Mongolian writing.
>
> Actually, the Todo, Manchu is created for removing these kind of 
> ambiguous writing forms (two or four character have same writing mode).
>
> But when we define the Unicde code point, we selected some characters 
> like https://r12a.github.io/scripts/mongolian/v/185Df.png, 
> https://r12a.github.io/scripts/mongolian/v/185Em1.png, 
> https://r12a.github.io/scripts/mongolian/v/1861m.pnghttps://r12a.github.io/scripts/mongolian/v/1863f.pnghttps://r12a.github.io/scripts/mongolian/v/1873m2.pnghttps://r12a.github.io/scripts/mongolian/v/1874f.pngfor 
> Sibe and Manchu.
>
> All of these form is not the isolate form actually.
>
> >>>>>
>


-- 
Badral Sanlig, Software architect
www.bolorsoft.com | www.badral.net
Bolorsoft LLC, Selbe Khotkhon 40/4 D2, District 11, Ulaanbaatar