RE: U+1824 & U+1826

Has anyone implemented a VS1 in their font?
Are there known issues in the use of a VS1?
Will the Microsoft Universal Shaping Engine handle it?
Harfbuzz, Apple’s rendering system?
Here is the description I have in the DS01 for the U+1826 Fifth Isolate.
Of course, the glyph will have to change.
The U+1824 line definition is similar.


Sent: Saturday, November 14, 2015 8:46 PM
Subject: RE: U+1824 & U+1826

Badral, Siqin,

Does the dot on the U/UE take the place of the dot on the N?
Then we need some sort of mechanism/logic to remove the normal dot on the N …


Sent: Saturday, November 14, 2015 8:25 PM
Subject: RE: U+1824 & U+1826

We have three parties that are verifying the existence of the dotted U/UE in the post-NNBSP position functioning as a genitive suffix marker.
We can add the 1824 as a Fourth Isolate Form, but we need a Fifth Isolate Form to add the 1826.
Do we use VS1 (U+FE00) for the 1826 Fifth Isolate?

Siqin, could you still go ahead with those two items mentioned earlier (the translation and the higher resolution scan) so that we can have it in our records?

Are there other items that I am forgetting?

Sent: Saturday, November 14, 2015 7:06 PM
Subject: Re: U+1824 & U+1826

I requested it early enough. Could you recognize it under

It is not just historical reason. It's not pre-classical form. Some few teacher, who apparently high qualified, still today teaches genitive case with this form in Mongolia.

Received on Tuesday, 17 November 2015 00:46:10 UTC