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

Re: FW: U+1885 / U+1886 changed from Letter to Mark

From: Andrew West <andrewcwest@gmail.com>
Date: Sat, 26 Dec 2015 17:36:33 +0000
Message-ID: <CALgEMhzuA5bijJjjAu1j5ofLjQHKmr6-XAxQ3jtHt26JSJsMjA@mail.gmail.com>
To: Greg Eck <greck@postone.net>
Cc: "public-i18n-mongolian@w3.org" <public-i18n-mongolian@w3.org>
Hi Greg,

Formatting of the charts is an editorial decision, i.e. largely down to
Michel, but yes I agree with both your suggestions.

> Then we could also change the glyph image such that there is a perforated
circle with the baluda to the right (considering that the dagalga is to the
left of the perforated circle).

In the chart the glyphs are rotated so that the baluda would be above the
circle, right?

Seasons Greetings,

Andrew


On 26 December 2015 at 16:09, Greg Eck <greck@postone.net> wrote:

> Hi Andrew,
>
> Could I ask your thoughts on the Unicode write-up for the two Baludas
> U+1885/U+1886.
>
> Here is the current description of the U+18A9 Dagalga described as a
> Diacritical Mark (I think we can delete the phrase "this is not a letter
> but a diacritical mark" as it is redundant with the heading)
>
>
>
> Here is the current description of the two Baludas
> What do you think of the idea of giving the 1885/1886 a similar heading to
> the Dagalga such as "Diacritical mark for Sanskrit and Tibetan"? Then we
> could also change the glyph image such that there is a perforated circle
> with the baluda to the right (considering that the dagalga is to the left
> of the perforated circle). That would make it very clear to font developers
> how the mark is to be laid out.
>
> Greg
>
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: Michel Suignard [mailto:michel@suignard.com <michel@suignard.com>]
> Sent: Friday, December 25, 2015 4:53 AM
> To: ishida@w3.org; Greg Eck <greck@postone.net>;
> public-i18n-mongolian@w3.org
> Subject: RE: U+1885 / U+1886 changed from Letter to Mark
>
> I would not do ruby/furigana for Mongolian, this is not a complication we
> need here.
> BTW, it would be great to have some proposal for these changes presented
> at the UTC end of January. I have already implemented a version of DS01 in
> the CD5.2 10646 which is the Unicode 9.0 backbone for Mongolian but will
> obviously update accordingly to the decision/consensus of this group. If we
> move category from letter to mark and some of these are combining marks we
> also need to show a dotted circle with them, that is an easy change from a
> chart production point of view.
>
> You can already check the current charts including Mongolian in
> http://www.unicode.org/L2/L2015/15339-n4705.pdf
> Michel
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: ishida@w3.org [mailto:ishida@w3.org <ishida@w3.org>]
> Sent: Thursday, December 24, 2015 1:52 AM
> To: Greg Eck <greck@postone.net>; public-i18n-mongolian@w3.org
> Subject: Re: U+1885 / U+1886 changed from Letter to Mark
>
> On 24/12/2015 09:49, ishida@w3.org wrote:
> > On 23/12/2015 15:05, Greg Eck wrote:
> >> Richard,
> >> What do you mean by a ruby - in your comment below?
> >
> > 'ruby' is an interlinear or intercharacter (in Trad Chinese)
> > annotation commonly used in Japanese and Chinese to provide phonetic
> > glosses for han characters that the user is not expected to know.  It
> > can also be used for other more semantic purposes.
> >
> > see http://www.w3.org/International/questions/qa-ruby for examples
>
> it may be referred to in japanese as furigana (although actually furigana
> is only the type of annotation that uses kana annotations – for example,
> you can also find furikanji and roman annotations).
>
> ri
>
>
>
>

ATT98545_1.jpg
(image/jpeg attachment: ATT98545_1.jpg)

ATT20240_2.jpg
(image/jpeg attachment: ATT20240_2.jpg)

Received on Saturday, 26 December 2015 17:37:27 UTC

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:07:45 UTC