Michael Everson wrote: [...] > > > RA + VIRAMA + ZWJ + YA (this is the reph-ya) > > > RA + VIRAMA + YA (this is the ra-yaphalaa) [...] > >... in the > >Indic OpenType secifications, you will see that a > >Ra+Virama is recognised as reph before any other processing > is applied. [...] > If this is the case (and one would like corroboration) then simply > reverse the two. The solution is the same.
Once a botch is implemented then others will sure follow. Replacing you original botch with yet another will make the encoding model into nothing other than a hack. Seeing as "one would like corroboration", there seems is no point in me wasting time by going into details. IMHO, TUS needs solid rules; Exceptions, hacks, patches, or workarounds should definitely be avoided wherever possible. (If you care to look back in the mailing list archives a few years, you will see that the "a+Virama+Ya+aa" kludge was originally proposed as a workaround due to the lack of a separate encoded letter) Andy
