On 12/02/2002 10:23:54 AM "Andy White" wrote: >> > Marco wrote >> >> My counter-proposal is: >> >> 09A4 + 034F + 09CD [= Khanda Ta] >> (TA + CGJ + VIRAMA)
>I thought about your proposal and checked up on the semantics of CGJ. The >Standard states, > "In particular, inserting a combining grapheme joiner between two >characters has no effect on their ligation or cursive joining behaviour" >Would that mean that CGJ should not change the shape of Ta Virama? >Any way I have a new counter, counter proposal. See my nest message. I don't think it would be a good idea to use CGJ for some new Indic shaping control; that kind of thing is only likely to get us into trouble down the road. - Peter --------------------------------------------------------------------------- Peter Constable Non-Roman Script Initiative, SIL International 7500 W. Camp Wisdom Rd., Dallas, TX 75236, USA Tel: +1 972 708 7485
