RE: New Proposal Status


Thank you for the suggestions on this “additional MisMatch” area.
At this point, I cannot facilitate more discussion, although well merited.
I plan to add a statement in the UTC documents stating “there are other mis-matches under discussion that may merit FVS assignment”.
At this point, I do not agree with FVS assignment here for the following reasons:

·         The context of these items is exclusive and very well defined since they are all suffixal forms.

·         The spread of the glyphs is wide and varied

·         Gain for the assignment is minimal while the cost of taking this through a Unicode approval process is great


Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2016 10:30 AM
Subject: Re: New Proposal Status

Because NNBSP(202F) is word separator,
so i(1822,185E,1873),u(1824),ue(1826) as genetive word better to define as Isolate form, not final form.
Same reason, i(1822,185E,1873),u(1824),ue(1826) in genetive words iyan,iyen,un,ud,uen,ued better to have a Initial form like d(1833) and y(1836).



Received on Thursday, 21 January 2016 15:18:34 UTC