Hi, Mr Jirimutu, I think you might've misunderstood me a lot… I'm basically on your side. The 1st point in my last email was saying I'm against the mixing of modern and historical variants in the standard (L2/16-309 is mad). I think it's unwise to encode historical variants now when the Mongolian script's modern usage is still a mess to be resolved — exactly on your side I think, isn't it? Actually for now I don't even think those historical variants should be encoded ever because they seem to be fonts' responsibility. The 2nd point was about that we need to be careful about mixing VS and FVS when we have to use them together some day. This point is not against your idea either. I don't even think we should introduce VS for Mongolian now, because modern variants won't need them and historical variants shouldn't be considered now — but just in case L2/16-309 gets favored by the China national body, we need to be prepared. For now I just really want those modern variants to be settled down (preferably without historical variants' intervention), the NNBSP issue to be resolved — see my comments in L2/ 17-052: http://www.unicode.org/L2/L2017/17052-mongolian-cmt.pdf No, I don't read Mongolian, but I'm a multilingual font technician who've started to work on Mongolian's Unicode and OpenType technologies with help from experts who know Mongolian (the script, and both the Mongolian and Manchu languages) very well (see L2/ 17-052 ). I really hope this clears your misunderstanding. Maybe, please read my last email again along with this email's clarification. Glad to talk to you. 梁海 Liang Hai
Received on Thursday, 26 January 2017 01:49:04 UTC