Re: U+1822 - finalizing all variants

Hi Greg,
Here are some images, which contains following forms.
1. Shabju form of i. F+FVS1 (tabi = fifty) Bui za, ze kho are same with 
this form.
We have deeply discussed about it with our linguists and Mr. 
Jamyansuren. We can probably manage it with our OTF rules regardless of 
which type of words (domestic/foriegn).
2. Normal form of i (Mori = horse)
No comment.
3. Accusative form of i (gal yg = accusative form of fire)
As previously mentioned it's also manageable by OTF rules.
4. Stretched form of i (hani = polite form of wife. For every word 
applicable) This form is planned to add as FVS2. It's also considerable 
for A E N D Ng G.
This is commonly used to write poem, letter, treatise etc. We should not 
consider it as calligraphic form because it's aimed to justify text 
We have concluded for that is really a FVS is necessary.


On 11.10.2015 09:16, Greg Eck wrote:
> Hi Badral,
> Could you give us some images of the two glyphs in actual words?
> That would make sure that we all understand the situation you are 
> describing.
> Are there other glyphs that you see not specified?
> We are just about ready to wrap up our discussions, so now is the time 
> to raise last issues.
> Thanks,
> Greg
> *From:*Badral S. []
> *Sent:* Sunday, October 11, 2015 7:14 AM
> *To:*
> *Subject:* Re: U+1822 - finalizing all variants
> Hi Greg,
> F+FVS1 
> imap:// 
> not only occurred after the consonants with bow (bi. Gi. Hi. ki pi fi) 
> but also may be used for every foreign words. Thus, we didn't find 
> better way to combine it with FVS1. Of course, we added the calt rules 
> for final 1822 after bi, pi, fi etc.
> F+FVS2 is accusative form after consonants and first form of ja, je 
> (bui za, bui ze). Currently, it is not distinguished in every font but 
> in real life it's slightly different. BS just planned to add it by 
> calt rules. But additionally, Mr. Jamyansuren has requested to add a 
> final form, which is mostly used to write poems. It seems like 
> stretched. I will send you it's picture, when I take it from Mr. 
> Jamyansuren. If we reserve F+FVS2, that won't hurt or?
> BTW: There is also one additional medial form of 1822, which is 
> occurred in medieval scripts before consonant DA like final I. If we 
> don't have free slots (FVSs), we can ignore it.
> Badral
> On 09.10.2015 15:22, Greg Eck wrote:
>     Sorry, I missed one comment on Bolorsoft.
>     There is one suggestion of a variant at F+FVS1
>     imap://
>     As this is a variant used only in a ligature, I suggest that it
>     does not need an explicit FVS assignment. It will never appear in
>     isolation. And if we begin to consider all of the variant forms
>     that the ligatures bring in, there will be no end.
>     There is also a suggested F+FVS2 that is very similar to the
>     current final.*Badral, could you comment further on this? I do not
>     see a distinction between the current Final and the suggested
>     F+FVS2 as listed in the comments on the Font Comparator site.*
>     Thanks,
>     Greg
>     *From:* Greg Eck []
>     *Sent:* Friday, October 9, 2015 9:12 PM
>     *To:*
>     <>
>     *Subject:* U+1822 - finalizing all variants
>     Let’s look at U+1822 together …
>     It appears that we are all in general agreement here except
>     possibly on placement of the new medial variants.
>     I will leave them as is unless there is further discussion here.
>     Greg
> -- 
> Badral Sanlig, Software architect
> <>  | <>
> Bolorsoft LLC, Selbe Khotkhon 40/4 D2, District 11, Ulaanbaatar

Badral Sanlig, Software architect |
Bolorsoft LLC, Selbe Khotkhon 40/4 D2, District 11, Ulaanbaatar

Received on Monday, 12 October 2015 13:50:49 UTC