[HarfBuzz] harfbuzz: Branch 'master' - 2 commits

[Behdad Esfahbod]

On 14-05-14 06:19 PM, Martin Hosken wrote:
> Dear Behdad,
> 
>>     The previous grammar for medial group was allowing an Asat after
>>     the medial group only if there was a medial Wa or Ha, but not if
>>     there was only a medial Ya.  This doesn't make sense to me and
>>     sounds reversed, as both medial Wa and Ha are below marks while
>>     Asat is an above mark.  An Asat can come before the medial group
>>     already (in fact, multiple ones can.  Why?!).  The medial Ya
>>     however is a spacing mark and according to Roozbeh it's valid
>>     to want an Asat on the medial Ya instead of the base, so it looks
>>     to me like we want to allow an Asat after the medial group if
>>     there *was* a Ya but not if there wasn't any.  Not wanting to
>>     produce dotted-circle where Windows is not, this commit changes
>>     the grammar to allow one Asat after the medial group no matter
>>     what comes in the group.
> 
> Might be worth reading UTN#11 on this. If Roozbeh has documentary evidence of languages where the asat really does go over the medial-ya rather than the consonant, then I would love to see it. The reasoning behind having the asat before the medial is because asat marks reduplication in that context in Burmese. It makes no sense to have an asat on a medial since people don't want to kill a sequence. Try saying a word final kw, you might be able to wrap your tongue around it, but it doesn't fit any languages around here.

Thanks Martin.  I'll wait for Roozbeh to comment on that.  But from my
perspective, the UTC#11 is mostly Chinese to me.  I mostly care about what The
OT spec says and what Windows does.  In this case, I'm still curious to know
why those say an Asat might come after a medial Wa or Ha, but not Ya.  Can you
comment on that?  Is that also what UTN#11 recommends?


Thanks,
behdad

> The aim of UTN#11 is to come up with a consistent ordering of diacritics that balances the need for consistency with appropriateness of spelling. For the most part it's OK, if a little complex. But that was because of pressure to put linguistic purity over technical expediency.
> 
> IOW, I think the change you have made is probably a wrong move :)
> 
> Yours,
> Martin
> _______________________________________________
> HarfBuzz mailing list
> HarfBuzz at lists.freedesktop.org
> http://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/harfbuzz
> 

-- 
behdad
http://behdad.org/