RE: U+1824 & U+1826

Hi Badral

The U+1824 & U+1826 with dotted final form is not popular usage in Inner
I have heard that it is occurred in some historical material from linguistic
It is existed in the earlier proposals and I am not sure when it is
disappeared from major list like Professor Quejingzhabu's book and GB26226

We have implemented in our font as U+1826+FVS2, if it is necessary, it is
better to add in encoding.

Thanks and best Regards

Almas Inc. 
101-0021 601 Nitto-Bldg, 6-15-11, Soto-Kanda, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo
E-Mail:   Mobile : 090-6174-6115
Phone : 03-5688-2081,   Fax : 03-5688-2082
Inner Mongolia Delehi Information Technology Co. Ltd.
010010 13th floor of Uiles Hotel, No 89 XinHua east street XinCheng
District, Hohhot, Inner Mongolia
Mail:       Mobile:18647152148
Phone:  +86-471-6661969,      Ofiice: +86-471-6661995
-----Original Message-----
From: Badral S. [] 
Sent: Thursday, October 15, 2015 7:52 PM
Subject: U+1824 & U+1826

Hi Greg,
I just checked again and
found an issue at U+1824/1826.
If we should filter FVS-s strictly, then we should probably consider u & ue
with drop which occurs after NA alternatively.
@Siqin & Jirumutu: Is this form exists in Inner Mongolia? If yes, how
popular is it?


Received on Friday, 16 October 2015 01:33:32 UTC