Re: [unicode] Telugu Unicode Encoding Review
I'm sorry for my comment is about only one item in the comments for Telugu encoding. Other items are also interesting (e.g. Telugu digits in Unicode are not taught in the schools). On Sat, 16 Oct 2010 19:49:07 -0700 Asmus Freytag asm...@ix.netcom.com wrote: On 10/16/2010 10:38 AM, suzuki toshiya wrote: I've never heard any comments about the reservation of the codepoints to making the code chart structure similar among multiple script, no posive, no negative. The source for this arrangement is an Indian National Standard. The important thing to remember is that when Unicode was first created, it was seen as very important to mimic the layout of 8-bit character sets for a given script - at least for those scripts that had fairly well established standards in the 80s. Yes I know. The design of the reserved codepoints was decided by ISCII, not by Unicode, not by ISO/IEC JTC1 /SC2/WG2. It was reasonable to make existing ISCII and ISO/IEC 10646 similar, to reduce the smooth interchange of them, at that time. For the standardization expert, even if one thinks the sparse insertion of the reserved codepoints in ISO/IEC 10646 as bad idea, he would agree with that keeping the same structure with ISCII is better than the incompatible structure. In fact, the structures of Indic scripts unencoded in ISCII are incompatible with Devanagari (e.g. Lepcha, Limbu, Meitei Mayak, Ol Chiki, ...). Anyway, I've never heard any comments about the reserved codepoints in the Brahmic scripts from the end user, I want to hear what they are recognized, and, if they are recognized useless, anybody want to use the reserved codepoints for other characters etc. As you know, in CJK fonts, often reserved codepoints are used for user-defined/extended characters and caused many troubles in the information interchange. While this seems quaint now, it did make it easier for people to become comfortable with Unicode - and to be able to tell quickly and reliably whether important character sets were fully covered. Without that, Unicode might never have established itself - as unbelievable as that may sound to those who did not experience that transition period first hand. I have no objection about this view. Regards, mpsuzuki Kiran Kumar Chava wrote (2010/10/17 2:06): Hi, At the link, http://geek.chavakiran.com/archives/55 , I tried to understand Telugu Unicode encoding and then I tried to do an out of box review of this encoding. Kindly let me know if I am missing something, mentioned as missing in above article are really missing or not. Any other views... Thanks in advance, Kiran Kumar Chava http://chavakiran.com
Re: [unicode] Telugu Unicode Encoding Review
Hi, I've never heard any comments about the reservation of the codepoints to making the code chart structure similar among multiple script, no posive, no negative. So your comment is interesting. Could you tell me more about what kind of disadvantages you're thinking of? If Telugu users are using 7-bit or 8-bit encoding and they want to use more codepoints for unencoded characters, the disadvantage (the reduction of the available codepoint) is clear. But... you're talking about Unicode. Regards, mpsuzuki Kiran Kumar Chava wrote (2010/10/17 2:06): Hi, At the link, http://geek.chavakiran.com/archives/55 , I tried to understand Telugu Unicode encoding and then I tried to do an out of box review of this encoding. Kindly let me know if I am missing something, mentioned as missing in above article are really missing or not. Any other views... Thanks in advance, Kiran Kumar Chava http://chavakiran.com
Re: [unicode] Telugu Unicode Encoding Review
On 10/16/2010 10:38 AM, suzuki toshiya wrote: Hi, I've never heard any comments about the reservation of the codepoints to making the code chart structure similar among multiple script, no posive, no negative. So your comment is interesting. Could you tell me more about what kind of disadvantages you're thinking of? The source for this arrangement is an Indian National Standard. As chapter 9 of TUS states in the introduction: They are all encoded according to a common plan, so that comparable characters are in the same order and relative location. This structural arrangement, which facilitates transliteration to some degree, is based on the Indian national standard (ISCII). The important thing to remember is that when Unicode was first created, it was seen as very important to mimic the layout of 8-bit character sets for a given script - at least for those scripts that had fairly well established standards in the 80s. While this seems quaint now, it did make it easier for people to become comfortable with Unicode - and to be able to tell quickly and reliably whether important character sets were fully covered. Without that, Unicode might never have established itself - as unbelievable as that may sound to those who did not experience that transition period first hand. A./ If Telugu users are using 7-bit or 8-bit encoding and they want to use more codepoints for unencoded characters, the disadvantage (the reduction of the available codepoint) is clear. But... you're talking about Unicode. Regards, mpsuzuki Kiran Kumar Chava wrote (2010/10/17 2:06): Hi, At the link, http://geek.chavakiran.com/archives/55 , I tried to understand Telugu Unicode encoding and then I tried to do an out of box review of this encoding. Kindly let me know if I am missing something, mentioned as missing in above article are really missing or not. Any other views... Thanks in advance, Kiran Kumar Chava http://chavakiran.com
