[HarfBuzz] Mai Kang Lai in Tai Tham, summary draft

[Andrew Cunningham]

I'm wondering how much some of the detail is language based and may be
handled using language systems?
On 21/05/2013 5:31 PM, "Theppitak Karoonboonyanan" <thep at linux.thai.net>
wrote:

> On Tue, May 21, 2013 at 4:39 AM, Richard Wordingham
> <richard.wordingham at ntlworld.com> wrote:
> > On Mon, 20 May 2013 15:08:19 +0700
> > Theppitak Karoonboonyanan <thep at linux.thai.net> wrote:
> >
> > For the recoding solution, you wrote:
> >
> > "A possible workaround is to exclude LA from the above rule. This is
> > quite safe because NGA and LA are never conjoined in Pali grammar."
> >
> > While Pali doesn't have -ṅl- or -ṃl-, we do have Sanskrit influence
> > to contend with.  Thus, although Pali for 'masculine' is _pullinga_, the
> > MFL lists <BA, U, MAI KANG, LA, I, NGA, SAKOT, LOW KA> ปุงลิงคะ with
> > this meaning. Given the dictionary's spelling habits, I half expected to
> > see MAI KANG LAI sitting on the BA.  I don't think we can rely on MAI
> > KANG LAI never sliding forward onto a LA.
>
> OK. The example implies that งฺล conjunct is still possible even in Pali.
> So, I've removed the workaround from the text.
>
> The Unicode amendment may not help, either, as the use of MEDIAL LA
> and side-subjoined LA is somewhat arbitrary.
>
> > If we're going to go for a coding solution, I'd rather go for a new
> > character.  However, out of ignorance, I have to ask - are non-shifted
> > MAI KANG LAI and CONSONANT SIGN NGA different?  Lao Tham suggests they
> > might be the same thing.
>
> Yes, they are the same for Lao Tham. When used to write Pali, it's MAI
> KANG LAI. When used to write Lao/Thai, it's FINAL NGA. But I heard
> that the two are of different shapes in Khuen. So, they can't be used to
> encode the same entity, I suppose.
>
> > Another conceivable solution you mention is, "Fonts for Lao Tham and
> > the shifting school of Lanna may provide GSUB rule to reorder Mai Kang
> > Lai themselves."
> >
> > This goes against what I first learnt about GSUB.  I suppose it is
> > tied up with how one handles editing of clusters of characters.
> > Perhaps I'm just a semi-literate foreigner, but I frequently find
> > myself having to edit 'legacy grapheme clusters'.  It's helpful when
> > the cursor actually shows me where I am within the cluster - but that
> > can only be done if the connection between characters and glyphs is
> > maintained.  Using GSUB to change the order of characters destroys that
> > information, which is why reordering is supposed to done by the
> > script-specific shaping logic.
>
> Understood. I've added some text describing the problem.
>
> > I still haven't equipped myself to experiment with GPOS as a way of
> > correcting the minor deficiencies of shaping.  I'm about two weeks away
> > at my current rate of progress.
>
> Let's add that to the page when you find some way out.
>
> > However, I think we are at a point where Behdad can say what he thinks
> > of the 'rphf' option.
>
> Agreed.
>
> Regards,
> --
> Theppitak Karoonboonyanan
> http://linux.thai.net/~thep/
> _______________________________________________
> HarfBuzz mailing list
> HarfBuzz at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/harfbuzz
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/harfbuzz/attachments/20130521/7019ad9a/attachment.html>