W3C home > Mailing lists > Public > public-i18n-mongolian@w3.org > January to March 2016

RE: New Proposal Status

From: Greg Eck <greck@postone.net>
Date: Thu, 21 Jan 2016 15:17:57 +0000
To: siqin <siqin@almas.co.jp>
CC: "public-i18n-mongolian@w3.org" <public-i18n-mongolian@w3.org>
Message-ID: <SN1PR10MB09439BD0B876B3511521EAD7AFC30@SN1PR10MB0943.namprd10.prod.outlook.com>
Siqin,

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

Greg

>>>>
Sent: Thursday, January 14, 2016 10:30 AM
Cc: public-i18n-mongolian@w3.org
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).

    isolate_i_u_ue_and_initial_i_u_ue.png

SiqinBilige.
>>>>

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

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.4.0 : Friday, 17 January 2020 16:07:50 UTC