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

RE: Two Final Threads - Diphthongs / Final glyph checks

From: Greg Eck <greck@postone.net>
Date: Fri, 9 Oct 2015 11:33:54 +0000
To: Greg Eck <greck@postone.net>, "public-i18n-mongolian@w3.org" <public-i18n-mongolian@w3.org>
Message-ID: <SN1PR10MB0943D8851C8AD4CF0096DB31AF340@SN1PR10MB0943.namprd10.prod.outlook.com>
I have read through the paper as written up by Jirimutu summarizing Mr. Liang Jin Bao's paper as attached. Much of the content is probably beyond the scope of our discussion in this forum. However points 4.e and 4.f should be brought forward.

4.e.) I think we have already agreed on how the the NNBSP-connected suffixes YIN, YI, IYEN, IYER [cid:image001.jpg@01D102C9.03670420] should be typed. Please note that the second suffix as highlighted did not shape correctly in the pdf attached. It should actually be a straight tooth as with the first suffix. I note this as this point will affect the OT rulings in our fonts.

4.f.) "Are there any changes to the Mongolian Script orthography?" is the question that is asked. If there are impacts from the Diphthong discussion that directly relate to a font's internal shaping mechanisms, then we should be made aware of this. Jirimutu, can you address this area as there is no detail in the summary?


From: Greg Eck [mailto:greck@postone.net]
Sent: Wednesday, October 7, 2015 12:09 AM
To: public-i18n-mongolian@w3.org
Subject: Two Final Threads - Diphthongs / Final glyph checks

With that I suggest that we invite Jirimutu and team to lead a discussion on diphthongs as we have not been able to have that yet. Would that be possible, Jirimutu?

(image/jpeg attachment: image001.jpg)

Received on Friday, 9 October 2015 11:34:26 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:07:44 UTC