[HarfBuzz] Old Korean T jamo that don't conjoin?

[Nathan Willis]

On Sat, Mar 31, 2018 at 5:33 AM, Richard Wordingham <
richard.wordingham at ntlworld.com> wrote:

> On Fri, 30 Mar 2018 18:15:13 -0500
> Nathan Willis <nwillis at glyphography.com> wrote:
>
> > If the rule was that only <Modern,Modern,Modern> would compose into
> > something in the Syllables block, that would make total sense to me.
> > But the comment makes it sound like <Old,Old,Modern> also maps to
> > stuff in the Syllables block and that it's only the Old Ts that are
> > excluded. That's what I don't understand.
>
> The comment is explaining which <LV,T> combinations compose at the
> character level.  I think you will find that LV combinations only exist
> for <Modern,Modern> combinations.  It is at that level that
> <Old,Old,Modern> is excluded.
>
>
Ah, okay; got it. I definitely was not considering how the L,V -> LV step
affected things either.

Makes sense now; thanks for the explanation!

Nate


> What you seem to be after is a change to the text on line 1154 from
>
> "Only the <L,V> sequences for the 11xx ranges combine."
>
> to
>
> "Only the <L,V> sequences for parts of the 11xx ranges combine."
>
> or
>
> "Only the <L,V> sequences for some L and some V combine."
>
> The interesting bit of Unicode history is why the consortium caved in
> to Korean demands for the full set of <modern, modern, modern> to be
> included.  An uninteresting bit of HarfBuzz archaeology would be
> whether someone briefly thought that the all L and V in the Hangul Jamo
> block composed at the character level.
>
> Richard.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> HarfBuzz mailing list
> HarfBuzz at lists.freedesktop.org
> https://lists.freedesktop.org/mailman/listinfo/harfbuzz
>



-- 
nathan.p.willis
nwillis at glyphography.com <http://identi.ca/n8>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.freedesktop.org/archives/harfbuzz/attachments/20180331/2a022925/attachment.html>