- From: Greg Eck <greck@postone.net>
- Date: Tue, 15 Dec 2015 06:58:13 +0000
- To: Andrew West <andrewcwest@gmail.com>
- CC: "public-i18n-mongolian@w3.org" <public-i18n-mongolian@w3.org>
OK, that would be great. Let me know if you need anything more. Thanks much, Greg -----Original Message----- From: Andrew West [mailto:andrewcwest@gmail.com] Sent: Tuesday, December 15, 2015 5:33 AM To: Greg Eck <greck@postone.net> Cc: public-i18n-mongolian@w3.org Subject: Re: Final Wrapup Hi Greg, I can write up a baluda document for the next UTC meeting if you like (but I won't have time to do it until after the new year). Andrew On 14 December 2015 at 11:29, Greg Eck <greck@postone.net> wrote: > Here are our current set of action points from our discussions. Please > let me know if I am leaving anything out … > > > > 1.) Adobe Acrobat dropping NNBSP upon cut-and-paste. Jirimutu, are you > going to follow-up on this one? > > 2.) U+1885 Baluda / U+1886 Triple Baluda proposal to change features so > that the glyphs function as marks rather than in-line letters – Does > someone want to volunteer to write this up? Or guide me in the process? > > 3.) Do we have agreement on the Isolate layout on the attached DS01 > document? I followed the set of principles sent out in the last email. > If we have agreement, then I will get with Richard Ishida and see if > we can get the changes on the font comparator site. > > 4.) Regarding the U+1828_NA – I don’t know how many are using a toggle > design to turn the NA dotting off and on. We had a problem of > available FVS’s at the medial location. If we say that the design is > actually a toggle, it takes care of the space problem as we no longer > need the FVS4 for the default over-ride. Everyone, please let me know > if this is an acceptable specification. If not, then we may need to > add the medial default over-ride with either VS01 or a new FVS4. > > 5.) Martin, I suggest that we wait on any of the Manchu work that you > have brought up. Is this OK? There will be a new Chinese standard > coming out next year sometime. That might be a good time to look at > the Manchu additions as they will no doubt have some of the same > additions that you are suggesting. > > 6.) We found one mistake in the specification during our Hohot > Discussions – that of the U+1887 Second Isolate. This form is actually > a final and requires a new VS assignment – either VS01 or FVS4. For > now, I have changed it to the Final+FVS4 in the DS01 document. Should > we propose another FVS4 or use the VS01? Either one brings a good > amount of work with it. But, we might be safer in staying with the FVS > set and propose FVS4. We are already looking at other situations > needing the FVS4 (U+182D_Medial, possibly U+1828_Medial). What does everyone think? > > 7.) FYI – The DS01 document has been fully updated and attached. > > 8.) FYI – The 15 Unicode code-point glyphs (actually 13) mentioned > earlier are now marked in the DS01 as being displayable only by using ZWJ. > It might be good for them all to be displayable with a standard format > – such as an FVS. > > 9.) FYI – The six FVS “mis-matches” (U+1820, U+1828, U+182C, U+182D, > U+1835, U+1836) have been backed out of the DS01 document. This makes > U+our NP > proposal compatible with the Chinese Standard except in one location > (U+182D_SecondIsolate uses a ZWJ). The Font Comparator site will > follow suit – sorry to ask you to do that Richard. > > 10.) FYI – The new variant glyphs we have agreed upon are highlighted > in purple on the DS01 attached. Professor Quejingzhabu asks that we > wait on pushing ahead with the specification of these as they have > many of them in the works already in the new Chinese standard coming > out next year. I agree with this as we might end up with conflicting specifications. > > > > Let’s see if we can get this wrapped up for the new year of 2016. > > > > Greg > >
Received on Tuesday, 15 December 2015 06:58:44 UTC