On 14-05-14 06:19 PM, Martin Hosken wrote: > Dear Behdad, > >> The previous grammar for medial group was allowing an Asat after >> the medial group only if there was a medial Wa or Ha, but not if >> there was only a medial Ya. This doesn't make sense to me and >> sounds reversed, as both medial Wa and Ha are below marks while >> Asat is an above mark. An Asat can come before the medial group >> already (in fact, multiple ones can. Why?!). The medial Ya >> however is a spacing mark and according to Roozbeh it's valid >> to want an Asat on the medial Ya instead of the base, so it looks >> to me like we want to allow an Asat after the medial group if >> there *was* a Ya but not if there wasn't any. Not wanting to >> produce dotted-circle where Windows is not, this commit changes >> the grammar to allow one Asat after the medial group no matter >> what comes in the group. > > Might be worth reading UTN#11 on this. If Roozbeh has documentary evidence of > languages where the asat really does go over the medial-ya rather than the > consonant, then I would love to see it. The reasoning behind having the asat > before the medial is because asat marks reduplication in that context in > Burmese. It makes no sense to have an asat on a medial since people don't > want to kill a sequence. Try saying a word final kw, you might be able to > wrap your tongue around it, but it doesn't fit any languages around here.
Thanks Martin. I'll wait for Roozbeh to comment on that. But from my perspective, the UTC#11 is mostly Chinese to me. I mostly care about what The OT spec says and what Windows does. In this case, I'm still curious to know why those say an Asat might come after a medial Wa or Ha, but not Ya. Can you comment on that? Is that also what UTN#11 recommends? Thanks, behdad > The aim of UTN#11 is to come up with a consistent ordering of diacritics that > balances the need for consistency with appropriateness of spelling. For the > most part it's OK, if a little complex. But that was because of pressure to > put linguistic purity over technical expediency. > > IOW, I think the change you have made is probably a wrong move :) > > Yours, > Martin > _______________________________________________ > HarfBuzz mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/harfbuzz > -- behdad http://behdad.org/ _______________________________________________ HarfBuzz mailing list [email protected] http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/harfbuzz
