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

Re: Issues with DA,NA,GA default medial variants

From: Andrew West <andrewcwest@gmail.com>
Date: Sun, 25 Oct 2015 18:44:47 +0000
Message-ID: <CALgEMhwBt23x087iO_Gby0c0w807kZ7_wwQ+OOCmZusz3gcDuA@mail.gmail.com>
To: "Badral S." <badral@bolorsoft.com>
Cc: public-i18n-mongolian@w3.org
Hi Badral,

There are still a significant number of websites using Unicode-encoded
Mongolian, and an unknown amount of Unicode Mongolian data that is not
online, and changing the meaning of any FVS will have a negative
impact on and a cost to people maintaining Unicode Mongolian data and
websites.   I do not speak for the UTC or WG2, but I think it is
highly unlikely that these committees would agree to switch any FVS
definition without a very compelling reason.


On 25 October 2015 at 16:47, Badral S. <badral@bolorsoft.com> wrote:
> Hi Andrew & Greg,
> I think the impact is slight because:
> 1. Most existing Mongolian data has still own encoding (non-unicode). In
> Mongolia, mostly used the fonts CM Urga, Ulaanbaatar etc. For instance:
> http://www.president.mn/mng, http://khumuunbichig.montsame.mn ...
> In inner Mongolia used mostly Menkhsoft's solution. Please comment
> Menksoft's representatives.
> 2. Most mongolian unicode data created using Mongolian script font, which
> has 15 years long correct default variants. In inner Mongolia used probably
> Mongolian Baiti. Mongolian Baiti was/is itself very unstable. For instance,
> as I know, it has in 2011 "Bichig" as "Bichig+fvs1" encoded. or? It means
> the existing mongolian unicode data is itself really not stable. If we
> change it to correct variant, we would implement normalisation tool for
> unicode mongolian data and distribute it freely.
> 3. I tend to think, the current default forms are not standardized globally.
> If not, can you redirect me and give me some references?
> Badral
> On 25.10.2015 13:48, Andrew West wrote:
>> On 25 October 2015 at 03:11, Badral S. <badral@bolorsoft.com> wrote:
>>> 1. Why we should not switch current U+1828 medial and U+1828 medial +
>>> FSV1?
>>> 2. Why we should not switch current U+1833 medial and U+1833 medial +
>>> FSV1?
>>> 3. Why we should not switch current U+182D medial and U+182D medial +
>>> FSV1?
>> Because it would destabilize existing Mongolian data.  In my opinion,
>> we should not switch existing FVS's, even when the alternative would
>> have made more sense for the reasons you mention.
>> Andrew
> --
> Badral Sanlig, Software architect
> www.bolorsoft.com | www.badral.net
> Bolorsoft LLC, Selbe Khotkhon 40/4 D2, District 11, Ulaanbaatar
Received on Sunday, 25 October 2015 18:45:36 UTC

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