On Sun, 01 Apr 2012 23:20:12 -0700 fantasai <[email protected]> wrote: >On 03/30/2012 01:12 PM, Andrew West wrote: >> >> I only have a couple of Old Yi books on my bookshelves, so I am no >> expert on the subject, but I think that in a way UCS Yi and "modern >> Old Yi" (Old Yi texts in modern publication) do share the same >> vertical writing preferences -- that is to say, in both scripts glyphs >> are written in the same orientation for both horizontal and vertical >> layout (i.e. there is no glyph rotation when horizontal text is laid >> out vertically). > >My theory (derived from the examples I have found, not from any historical >notes on the Yi standardization process) is that Yi's vertical text was >rotated 90deg to create UCS Yi: both the orientation of the characters >and the writing direction compass were rotated, creating a horizontal script. >And my theory is that UCS Yi is now typeset vertically with each glyph >upright in titles and captions because, being printed in China by Chinese >book publishers, it's copying the way Chinese characters behave. However, >this creates an inconsistency with old Yi.
Hmm, I think there is no consensus (among non Yi people) about the importance of the consistency between UCS Yi and Old Yi. The "agreed" materials in our hands now are: horizontal UCS Yi text, and vertical Old Yi text. The short vertical strings of UCS Yi (and Old Yi in typesetted matters) are found by you, Andrew, and me, but the recognization about their importance is not in consensus. I appreciate your careful attitude considering the possibility that the found short vertical strings are formed under the influence of Chinese typography. So, for further discussion, we need an UCS Yi materials with vertical text that has no influence from Chinese typography? How to evaluate the influence? If the book has a colophone in Chinese, it should be excluded? I'm questionable about the safety of the selective sampling of the materials to exclude the influence of Chinese typography. Although I have no objection against the attitude to the priority to the writing rule developed autonomously, I'm afraid that expecting a clear separation in the relationship between UCS Yi and Chinese typography is unsafe. Because UCS Yi was a script standardized in PRC era, and the users of UCS Yi may be exposed to the strong influence of modern Chinese typography. I'm not saying that the consistency and similarity with Chinese typography should be considered for UCS Yi in vertical writing mode, but I want to say the selective sampling might be unsafe. Thus, it might be unsafe to give the higher priority to the assumed consistency between Old Yi and UCS Yi than the found material including short vertical strings of UCS Yi (and short horizontal Old Yi). I will try to contact with Japanese scholars studying Yi languages, but I cannot guarantee their knowledges are independent from the influence of Chinese typography (or some bias from Japanese typography). >This is only based on a loose inspection of materials, however; I haven't >done any great research on the topic, and am not very familiar with the >Yi writing system. > >The question in my mind is, > a) does the Yi community consider the Chinese style of typesetting > vertical captions and suchlike to be the only correct way, or > b) is it a consequence of the Chinese typesetting software that such text > is typeset this way, and the correct orientation would match Old Yi, or > c) would the Yi community consider either option acceptable and a matter > of stylistic preference, similar to Latin characters, whose native text > orientation is not vertical and thus can be found typeset both sideways > and upright >I don't know the answer to this, but it is this question that would determine >Yi's orientation characteristics in UTR50. If there is no answer by closing date for PRI#207 (2012-May-01), UTR50 will leave the vertical text properties for UCS Yi as undefined because of the lack of sufficient evidences? Or, the assumption (consistency with Old Yi) is used to define vertical writing mode properties temporarily? >The research materials I have are here: > http://fantasai.inkedblade.net/style/scans/ >Scans LoC045 through LoC099 are from the Yi books in the National Library >of China in Beijing, circa 2005. Thanks, also I found your comment in the discussion with Eric Muller, http://lists.w3.org/Archives/Public/www-style/2011Oct/0128.html Regards, mpsuzuki
