RE: Two Final Threads - Diphthongs / Final glyph checks

Hi Greg

 

>But could I ask Jirimutu – is this what you are proposing that ligature sequence <U+1836><U+1822>  be encoded as one glyph?  

>This would be typed as code-point U+1836 plus one code-point U+180C?

No. It is not my proposal meaning. The medial form   should always be  <U+1836><U+1822> exactly.  No extra FVS after<U+1836> in anytime and any case.

What I am insisting here is that we cannot  sacrifice this regular medial form become any kind of irregular encoding.

(Like Badral’s propose in recent mail to use FVS2 or FVS3 to over-ride, actually it is not over-riding, it is replacing beams and pillars with inferior ones)

 

Let me clearly summarize about the <U+1836_YA> medial form encoding proposal rule entirely again.

 

1.      We accept the current NP Variant Form encoding for <U+1836_YA> exactly. It is the  is the first medial form o and  is the second medial form. 

 

For the people who want to use <U+1836_YA> and <U+1822_I> to encode . 

2.      No extra contextual rule for  if anyone want to use <U+1836_YA> and <U+1822_I> to encode it, the code should be explicitly as <U+1836_YA><FVS1><U+1822_I>.

(Note: we do not agree to use contextual rule here like if <U+1836_YA> before <U+1822_I> become , 

because that will sacrifice The medial form   should always be  <U+1836><U+1822> requirements.)

3.      But the  followed after <U+1822_I>, <U+1825_OE>, <U+1826> in first syllable, it will become .  

We need to explicitly define its encoding for the people who want to use <U+1836_YA> for this long tooth.

I have provided examples in previous mail like ᠦᠢᠯᠡᠰ · ᠰᠦᠢᠳᠦᠯ · ᠰᠢᠢᠳᠪᠦᠷᠢ etc.  

For example, ᠦᠢᠯᠡᠰ should be encoded as <U+1826_UE><U+1836_YA><FVS1><U+182F_L><U+1821_E><U+182F>. 

The first long tooth is the part of <U+1826_UE> and The second long tooth is <U+1836_YA><FVS1>. We cannot neglect this FVS1 too.

 

For the people who want to use <U+1822_I> to encode . 

 

4.      The  is encoded as <U+1822_I> and it will follow the <U+1822_I> character rule in here. 

(I have skip the details here. Please refer previous Greg’s over-riding rule definition document for <U+1822_I>)

 

5.      But in this case the  followed after <U+1822_I>, <U+1825_OE>, <U+1826> in first syllable, it will become  too. 

We need to explicitly define its encoding for the people who want to use <U+1822_I> for this long tooth.

I have provided examples in previous mail like ᠦᠢᠯᠡᠰ · ᠰᠦᠢᠳᠦᠯ · ᠰᠢᠢᠳᠪᠦᠷᠢ etc.  

For example, ᠦᠢᠯᠡᠰ should be encoded as <U+1826_UE><U+182F_L><U+1821_E><U+182F>. 

The first long tooth is the part of <U+1826_UE> and The second long tooth is <U+1822_I>. We do not need any more FVS here.

 

All of Mongolian font should implement all of the encoding rule listed above. 

No exception here is for we can correctly display each other’s context in any fonts.

 

The same thing will be listed for <U+1838_W>. Let me skip it here for simplify my mail.

 

Thanks and Regards,

 

Jirimutu

===============================================================

Almas Inc. 

101-0021 601 Nitto-Bldg, 6-15-11, Soto-Kanda, Chiyoda-ku, Tokyo

E-Mail: jrmt@almas.co.jp <mailto:jrmt@almas.co.jp>    Mobile : 090-6174-6115

Phone : 03-5688-2081,   Fax : 03-5688-2082

http://www.almas.co.jp/   http://www.compiere-japan.com/

http://www.mongolfont.com/

---------------------------------------------------------------

Inner Mongolia Delehi Information Technology Co. Ltd.

010010 13th floor of Uiles Hotel, No 89 XinHua east street XinCheng District, Hohhot, Inner Mongolia

Mail:  jirimutu@delehi.com <mailto:jirimutu@delehi.com>        Mobile:18647152148

Phone:  +86-471-6661969,      Ofiice： +86-471-6661995

http://www.delehi.com/

===============================================================

 

From: Greg Eck [mailto:greck@postone.net] 
Sent: Saturday, November 21, 2015 12:44 AM
To: jrmt@almas.co.jp; 'Badral S.' <badral@bolorsoft.com>; public-i18n-mongolian@w3.org
Subject: RE: Two Final Threads - Diphthongs / Final glyph checks

 

Hi Jirimutu,

 

I did not have time to sort through all of the correspondence today as I leave for Hohot tomorrow.

But could I ask Jirimutu – is this what you are proposing that ligature sequence <U+1836><U+1822>  be encoded as one glyph?  

This would be typed as code-point U+1836 plus one code-point U+180C?

If so, this is highly irregular and has never been done before in Mongolian.

 

Please clarify,

Greg

 

>>>>> 

Sent: Friday, November 20, 2015 6:35 PM
Subject: RE: Two Final Threads - Diphthongs / Final glyph checks

 

Let explain my answer clearly.

 

>Could you confirm that the following is our agreed upon specification for the Medial U+1836?



Yes. The list provided above is exactly match our requirements. 

 

 

> Badral,

> As I understand you are ok with this specification except that you want to add one line



>Is that correct? If not, could you modify the above so that it matches your desired specification?

 

We do not accept this over-riding in any kind of design. Because it will discard our request of the medial form   should be encoded with no FVS at all.

This is widely accepted spelling of Mongolian tradition for medial form of . (U+1836, U1822).  we do not allow any extra FVS for YA here.

This is mean, the SAYIQAN (means “recently”) should encoded without FVS for YA. 

It is not just one word. There is a lot kind of this words . please find the attached example list from Siqin before.

 

I would like to remind all that it is impossible to use over-riding rule for this character. The  is not irregular case. It is regular case.

But for inner Mongolian peopleis irregular case. Should use FVS1 to distinguish if you like use YI to encode it.

 

 

Jirimutu

>>>>>