As Michka wrote the matter (x , ksh) is being discussed elsewhere at present.
Sorry it was typo: It should be ng in English (not en) and ng in penguin. I can't take my head off: keep saying rendering instead of complex rendering. I'll try. Sinnathurai ----- Original Message ----- From: "Doug Ewell" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> To: "Unicode Mailing List" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Cc: "Avarangal" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Sent: Wednesday, January 08, 2003 4:40 PM Subject: Re: A case for Tamil-X (k sh) > Sinnathurai Srivas <avarangal at hotmail dot com> wrote: > > > ie, with rendering enabled one can not have ksh, but only x. > > without rendering only ksh is possible and not x. > > "Without rendering," neither is possible. As I tried to explain last > July 22, the term "rendering" refers to the general process of mapping > characters to glyphs. The process you are talking about is "complex > rendering." > > > An analogy is > > > > en in English is a single consonant (though written as en), but > > en in penguin is two independent consonants. > > How can "en" in "English" be considered a single consonant? It's > pronounced [ɪŋ], a vowel (U+026A) followed by a consonant (U+014B). The > g is pronounced separately: [ˈɪŋɡlɪʃ]. > > A better analogy would be: > > sh in hogwash is a single consonant (though written as sh), but > sh in hogshead is two independent consonants. > > There may be merit in adding this new "x" character (or perhaps the > problem could be solved with ZWNJ or ZWJ), but Michael is correct: > although it's a good idea to discuss it on the list first, nothing will > be considered for addition unless a proper proposal is written and > submitted. > > -Doug Ewell > Fullerton, California >
