Re: Bangla(Bengali) letter Missing
> The guidlines for devanagari show these rules: > Ta virama = Ta virama (when final) > Ta virama ZWNJ = Ta virama > Ta virama [...] = conjunct form > Ta virama ZWJ = Devanagari half form of ta (= khando-ta?) I also shifted from standard by suggesting that Ta+virama = Khando-Ta(when final). Maximum times khando-ta need to be rendered so I like that idea of yours. > > In my opinion it will be much simpler for all, if khondo-to is the normal > for produced when typing 'ta virama' But this will lead to some ambiguity. Consider the word uttap(Heat) in bangla. Here we need to use conjunct form of ta with ta. Also consider utpat (disturbance), where khando-ta representation using only virama will lead to the confusion whether it will form conjuct ta+pa or form Khando-ta. So, this must be done using virama as per standard. The simplicity you prefer lies on the efficient keyboard and software design - that will insert two unicode character automatically upon typing khando-ta. So, this would not be much problem in the long run. > > Also consider the following: > *Khando-ta is not a half form* > The Devanagari half form is the first half of a conjunct (usually the > character with its right stem missing) > Khando-ta is a character in its self, not half a character. > Khando-ta does not have to precede any other character i.e. it can occur > isolated > It is often (incorrectly) listed as part of the alphabet. > Half forms do not end words - khando-ta does. I agree that the existing half form of Devanagari is different than that of Khando-ta. But the difference is only on the rendering - I think. I think the half form and khando(sect -> half ) was actually same. By the way of time they have aparted this far. So, if we consider it as half form we will be loyal to the root. Last of all, Do you think that we should demand another code for Khando-ta ? I think we should. It has become a distinct character of Bangla language now. Regards, Zia
Re: Bangla(Bengali) letter Missing
Abdul Malik <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> If that is so, it only leaves the problem of how to display Unicode
> encoded text, where the language is not known.
Well, you could always use U+E0001 U+E0061 U+E0073 to mark your
Assamese text and U+E0001 U+E0062 U+E006E to mark your Bengali text.
Then an application that understands the details of both languages may
be able to render 'da virama ba' in the linguistically correct way.
> I mean should 'da virama ba' be displayed as 'dba' or 'dva'? A
> bangladeshi would expect 'dva' (the common form) but an assamiya
> reader would expect 'dba' or 'da virama ba' to be displayed ('dva'
> being displayed only for da virama va)
>
> Hmm. I think then, that the default behaviour of an application
Thank you for providing my counterexample. You spell 'behaviour' with
a 'u', as do most speakers of British, Australian, and even Canadian
English. As an American, however, I spell it without the 'u'. Yet
we still understand it to be the same word.
Are the differences between Bengali and Assamese so minor that reading
'dba' instead of 'dva' will cause words to be misunderstood?
-Doug Ewell
Fullerton, California
Re: Bangla(Bengali) letter Missing
> > My question is, should speakers of Bangla be restricted to be able to
form
> > only the common forms, or should there be a way for us to produce both
> forms
> > shown? Or perhaps do you expect us (Bangladeshis) to use the assami Va?
>
> In the grammar book by Munir chowdhury, Mofazzal Haider Ch. and Ibrahim
> Khalil (Text book for S.S.C), vba is omitted from the bangla character
set.
> It is confusing for common people. So I think the decision is wise.
>
> Regards,
>
> Zia
>
Okay, I think by this you mean that for bangla (language) only the common
forms should be displayed?
If that is so, it only leaves the problem of how to display Unicode encoded
text, where the language is not known. I mean should 'da virama ba' be
displayed as 'dba' or 'dva'? A bangladeshi would expect 'dva' (the common
form) but an assamiya reader would expect 'dba' or 'da virama ba' to be
displayed ('dva' being displayed only for da virama va)
Hmm. I think then, that the default behaviour of an application should be to
render the common forms, and only display the other forms, or with a visible
virama, when the language is known not to be bangla. (But I'm biased, I
doubt that someone from assam would agree with that.)
(Another solution would be to insist that assami writers always insert a
ZWNJ / ZWJ before their Ba's so that we don't confuse them with Va's ;-))
That only leaves the problem of how to deal with Assamiya text quoted within
Bangla text.
Oh well, I think i'll leave that for another day.
In any case, I think distinguishing between Ba and Va is only going to be a
problem in rare circumstances.
Best regards
Abdul
Re: Bangla(Bengali) letter Missing
> > > The difference is only ZWNJ and ZWJ after virama. I think you should try the > guidelines of Unicode 3.0 standards. My opinion follows the guideline. Since > all indic languages are derived from sanskreet hence I think the guideline > for devanagari is not absolutely useless for Bangla. > But Devanagari does not have a khando-ta Following the guidlines, to form a khando-ta at the end of a word, it will then be nessecery to type Ta virama ZWJ Don't you think that it would be better not to have to type the ZWJ every time one needs to form khando ta? The guidlines for devanagari show these rules: Ta virama = Ta virama (when final) Ta virama ZWNJ = Ta virama Ta virama [...] = conjunct form Ta virama ZWJ = Devanagari half form of ta (= khando-ta?) In my opinion it will be much simpler for all, if khondo-to is the normal for produced when typing 'ta virama' Also consider the following: *Khando-ta is not a half form* The Devanagari half form is the first half of a conjunct (usually the character with its right stem missing) Khando-ta is a character in its self, not half a character. Khando-ta does not have to precede any other character i.e. it can occur isolated It is often (incorrectly) listed as part of the alphabet. Half forms do not end words - khando-ta does. Regards Abdul
Re: Bangla(Bengali) letter Missing
> > Now I came to the conclusion that there is a way to represent khando-ta in > Standard and that is quite satisfactory. > > > > However some indications are confusing. So I am writing my understanding, > > > > Ta + Virama + ZWNJ = ta with explicit virama > > Ta + Virama + consonant = Conjunct (ta + consonant) > > Ta + Virama = Khando-ta (while occurs final ) > > Ta + Virama + ZWJ = Khando-ta (explicit half - consonant) > > > This was my suggestion: > [Ta] [virama] -> [khando-ta] (when final) > [Ta] [virama] [ZWNJ] -> [khando-ta] > [Ta] [virama] [] -> [appropriate conjunt form] > [Ta] [Virama] [ZWJ] -> [Ta Virama] The difference is only ZWNJ and ZWJ after virama. I think you should try the guidelines of Unicode 3.0 standards. My opinion follows the guideline. Since all indic languages are derived from sanskreet hence I think the guideline for devanagari is not absolutely useless for Bangla. > of the 'Bengali Script' and *not* the 'Bangladeshi language'. Assami and > monipuri writers *do* make the distinction, but they have the luxury of > being able to use Assami Va (U+09F1) as well as Ba (U+09AC) to produce the > two forms shown in my gif. > Speakers of Bangla make the distinction of the two forms depending only on > context. e.g.. svaamii is spelt sbami and pronunced shami and not sbami by > Bangladeshis, whilst in Assamiya it is spelt svami (with U+09F1) not sbami. > My question is, should speakers of Bangla be restricted to be able to form > only the common forms, or should there be a way for us to produce both forms > shown? Or perhaps do you expect us (Bangladeshis) to use the assami Va? In the grammar book by Munir chowdhury, Mofazzal Haider Ch. and Ibrahim Khalil (Text book for S.S.C), vba is omitted from the bangla character set. It is confusing for common people. So I think the decision is wise. Regards, Zia
Re: Bangla(Bengali) letter Missing
- Original Message - From: Md Ziaur Rahman Sent: Friday, July 28, 2000 9:38 PM Subject: Re: Bangla(Bengali) letter Missing > Now I came to the conclusion that there is a way to represent khando-ta in Standard and that is quite satisfactory. > > However some indications are confusing. So I am writing my understanding, > > Ta + Virama + ZWNJ = ta with explicit virama > Ta + Virama + consonant = Conjunct (ta + consonant) > Ta + Virama = Khando-ta (while occurs final ) > Ta + Virama + ZWJ = Khando-ta (explicit half - consonant) This was my suggestion: [Ta] [virama] -> [khando-ta] (when final) [Ta] [virama] [ZWNJ] -> [khando-ta] [Ta] [virama] [] -> [appropriate conjunt form] [Ta] [Virama] [ZWJ] -> [Ta Virama] Note that this (my suggestion) does not follow the Unicode3.0 guidelines, but I believe these guidelines were written only with Devanagari in mind. In any case, this is the way it's done in my implementation, and follows ISCII implementations. > > Am I right ? >> A more of a concern of mine is the lack of a 'Bengali letter Va' in the >> standard. >> Some Bangla texts make a distinction where a conjoint forms with ba and va. >> see http://www.btinternet.com/~abdulmalik/banglaglyphs.GIF >> >> How am I to encode the different forms in unicode? >> >> Also note the 'two symbols commonly found in Bangla fonts' - do these need >> to be included in the standard? >We do not make any distinction between bo and vo while they forms a conjunct. You say, "We do not make any distinction". Don't forget that we are talking of the 'Bengali Script' and *not* the 'Bangladeshi language'. Assami and monipuri writers *do* make the distinction, but they have the luxury of being able to use Assami Va (U+09F1) as well as Ba (U+09AC) to produce the two forms shown in my gif. Speakers of Bangla make the distinction of the two forms depending only on context. e.g.. svaamii is spelt sbami and pronunced shami and not sbami by Bangladeshis, whilst in Assamiya it is spelt svami (with U+09F1) not sbami. My question is, should speakers of Bangla be restricted to be able to form only the common forms, or should there be a way for us to produce both forms shown? Or perhaps do you expect us (Bangladeshis) to use the assami Va? > I have not seen your two common glyphs in Bangla. So I can't help it. [you] Yes, these glyphs seem to be only common in fonts, and not in texts. The first symbol is part of BSD1520 1995 'the Bangladesh Standard 1520', I have seen the second symbol in many Bangla fonts, it appears to be equivalent to the @ sign , but would it be appropriate to map it to such? I don't think so > I want to know how can I integrate the unicode with font file ? Is there any convention ? Yes definitely, it depends on what you want to do exactly. You could start your quest here: http://www.microsoft.com/typography/OTSPEC/indicot/default.htm Best regards Abdul > Thanks everybody, > Md Ziaur Rahman Hello Ziaur Rahman Khando-ta does need special attention, including it in the standard would make encoding it much easier. For those that don't know, khanda-ta is a special form of ta that is used when ta has its inherent vowel suppressed. i.e. It is equivalent to 'ta virama'. It often occurs when final in a word, and also medial but never initial. Ta with a visible virama does not occur in any Bangladeshi word, 'khanda-ta' or plain 'ta' are always used in its place. However, 'Ta virama' may be needed in educational texts and possibly in some foreign words In the absence of khanda-ta being included in the standard, the following rendering rules will need to be observed for the Bangla script There are cases in Indic scripts where the Unicode standard states that a 'explicit virama' character should be displayed. In such cases, if the base consonant is 'Bengali Letter Ta', Khanda-ta needs to be rendered instead of the expected 'ta_virama' i.e. Ta virama when final, is rendered as khanda-ta, and Ta virama ZWNJ is rendered as khanda-ta In other words khanda-ta is to be considered the explicit virama form of ta The standard states that when a sequence such as 'consonant virama consonant' occurs, and there is no predefined conjunct formation* in the font, the first consonant should rendered as a half form. As Bangla does not posses half forms the consonant should be displayed with a visible virama, so Ta virama consonant (no defined form) is displayed as Ta Virama consonant Ta virama ZWJ is displayed as Ta Virama *(In the example 'utsab' (festival), 'ts' is written as khando-ta sa. Here 'khando-ta sa' needs to be considerd as a conjunct form i.e. defined in the font.) Abdul
Re: Bangla(Bengali) letter Missing
On Thu, 27 Jul 2000, Abdul Malik wrote
> > Robert Brady wrote:
> > > On Thu, 27 Jul 2000, Abdul Malik wrote:
> > > > How am I to encode the different forms in unicode?
> > >
> > > For the last three, you can do something like
> > > BENGALI LETTER WHATEVER
> > > BENGALI VIRAMA
> > > BENGALI LETTER BA
> > > for the -va form, and
> > >
> > > BENGALI LETTER WHATEVER
> > > BENGALI VIRAMA
> > > ZERO WIDTH JOINER
> > > BENGALI LETTER BA
> > > for the -ba form.
>
> >
> > That's what I was going to post, but you were quicker ;-)
>
> What about the first example?
>
> > However, this mechanism (VIRAMA + ZWJ) should only be for forcing a
> > particular *visual* representation of the *same* orthographic entities:
> > halfConsonant + fullConsonant vs. ligature.
> >
> > In this case, Abdul Malik claims that there are also *phonetic*
> differences
> > ("bbo" vs. "bvo", "cvo" vs. "cbo", etc.). So why using this hack rather
> than
> > including a proper "va" letter?
>
> (the phonetic differences are real)
>
> > Of course, I see the problem: "ba" and "va" would be identical in most
> > cases, and this may lead to confusion (imagine having two keys showing
> > identical letters: which is which?).
>
> Yes indeed, I would put it stronger:
> Ba and Va when in isolation: both look the same, are pronunced the same, and
> are called by the same name by speakers of Bangla
> so a hack method looks to me to be more favourable.
> Having said that, It is definately *not* an ideal or good solution.
>
> > Nevertheless, there are several examples of characters that are exactly
> the
> > same visually, but have been kept separate on the bases that they are
> > logically different.
> >
> > E.g., the isolate and final forms of U+06CC ARABIC LETTER FARSI YEH are
> > identical to U+0649 ARABIC LETTER ALEF MAKSURA [...]
>
> So how do I know wich key to press on my keyboard?
>
Shouldn't it(ba or va) be the same key on your keyboard? As both Ba and
Va are
differing only visually and give different results only for the
particualr combinations(as in your example).
>
>
>
> Abdul
>
Dhrubajyoti Banerjee
E.T. Gist/SoftwareUmashankar Co-op Housing Society
C-DAC Plot No. 155/1/5
Pune University CampusAundh
Ganesh Khind PUNE-411007
PUNE-411007
Re: Bangla(Bengali) letter Missing
> Robert Brady wrote:
> > On Thu, 27 Jul 2000, Abdul Malik wrote:
> > > How am I to encode the different forms in unicode?
> >
> > For the last three, you can do something like
> > BENGALI LETTER WHATEVER
> > BENGALI VIRAMA
> > BENGALI LETTER BA
> > for the -va form, and
> >
> > BENGALI LETTER WHATEVER
> > BENGALI VIRAMA
> > ZERO WIDTH JOINER
> > BENGALI LETTER BA
> > for the -ba form.
>
> That's what I was going to post, but you were quicker ;-)
What about the first example?
> However, this mechanism (VIRAMA + ZWJ) should only be for forcing a
> particular *visual* representation of the *same* orthographic entities:
> halfConsonant + fullConsonant vs. ligature.
>
> In this case, Abdul Malik claims that there are also *phonetic*
differences
> ("bbo" vs. "bvo", "cvo" vs. "cbo", etc.). So why using this hack rather
than
> including a proper "va" letter?
(the phonetic differences are real)
> Of course, I see the problem: "ba" and "va" would be identical in most
> cases, and this may lead to confusion (imagine having two keys showing
> identical letters: which is which?).
Yes indeed, I would put it stronger:
Ba and Va when in isolation: both look the same, are pronunced the same, and
are called by the same name by speakers of Bangla
so a hack method looks to me to be more favourable.
Having said that, It is definately *not* an ideal or good solution.
> Nevertheless, there are several examples of characters that are exactly
the
> same visually, but have been kept separate on the bases that they are
> logically different.
>
> E.g., the isolate and final forms of U+06CC ARABIC LETTER FARSI YEH are
> identical to U+0649 ARABIC LETTER ALEF MAKSURA [...]
So how do I know wich key to press on my keyboard?
Abdul
Re: Bangla(Bengali) letter Missing
> Robert Brady wrote:
> > On Thu, 27 Jul 2000, Abdul Malik wrote:
> > > How am I to encode the different forms in unicode?
> >
> > For the last three, you can do something like
> > BENGALI LETTER WHATEVER
> > BENGALI VIRAMA
> > BENGALI LETTER BA
> > for the -va form, and
> >
> > BENGALI LETTER WHATEVER
> > BENGALI VIRAMA
> > ZERO WIDTH JOINER
> > BENGALI LETTER BA
> > for the -ba form.
>
> That's what I was going to post, but you were quicker ;-)
What about the first example?
> However, this mechanism (VIRAMA + ZWJ) should only be for forcing a
> particular *visual* representation of the *same* orthographic entities:
> halfConsonant + fullConsonant vs. ligature.
>
> In this case, Abdul Malik claims that there are also *phonetic*
differences
> ("bbo" vs. "bvo", "cvo" vs. "cbo", etc.). So why using this hack rather
than
> including a proper "va" letter?
(the phonetic differences are real)
> Of course, I see the problem: "ba" and "va" would be identical in most
> cases, and this may lead to confusion (imagine having two keys showing
> identical letters: which is which?).
Yes indeed, I would put it stronger:
Ba and Va when in isolation: both look the same, are pronounced the same,
and
are called by the same name by speakers of Bangla
so a hack method looks to me to be more favourable.
Having said that, It is definitely *not* an ideal or good solution.
> Nevertheless, there are several examples of characters that are exactly
the
> same visually, but have been kept separate on the bases that they are
> logically different.
>
> E.g., the isolate and final forms of U+06CC ARABIC LETTER FARSI YEH are
> identical to U+0649 ARABIC LETTER ALEF MAKSURA [...]
So how do I know which key to press on my keyboard?
Abdul
RE: Bangla(Bengali) letter Missing
Robert Brady wrote:
> On Thu, 27 Jul 2000, Abdul Malik wrote:
> > How am I to encode the different forms in unicode?
>
> For the last three, you can do something like
> BENGALI LETTER WHATEVER
> BENGALI VIRAMA
> BENGALI LETTER BA
> for the -va form, and
>
> BENGALI LETTER WHATEVER
> BENGALI VIRAMA
> ZERO WIDTH JOINER
> BENGALI LETTER BA
> for the -ba form.
That's what I was going to post, but you were quicker ;-)
However, this mechanism (VIRAMA + ZWJ) should only be for forcing a
particular *visual* representation of the *same* orthographic entities:
halfConsonant + fullConsonant vs. ligature.
In this case, Abdul Malik claims that there are also *phonetic* differences
("bbo" vs. "bvo", "cvo" vs. "cbo", etc.). So why using this hack rather than
including a proper "va" letter?
Of course, I see the problem: "ba" and "va" would be identical in most
cases, and this may lead to confusion (imagine having two keys showing
identical letters: which is which?).
Nevertheless, there are several examples of characters that are exactly the
same visually, but have been kept separate on the bases that they are
logically different.
E.g., the isolate and final forms of U+06CC ARABIC LETTER FARSI YEH are
identical to U+0649 ARABIC LETTER ALEF MAKSURA, but they have been
differentiated on the basis that they have different pronunciation and
joining behavior. In fact, U+06CC also has initial and medial forms, that
are identical to the corresponding forms of letter U+064A ARABIC LETTER YEH.
_ Marco
Re: Bangla(Bengali) letter Missing
On Thu, 27 Jul 2000, Abdul Malik wrote: > How am I to encode the different forms in unicode? For the last three, you can do something like BENGALI LETTER WHATEVER BENGALI VIRAMA BENGALI LETTER BA for the -va form, and BENGALI LETTER WHATEVER BENGALI VIRAMA ZERO WIDTH JOINER BENGALI LETTER BA for the -ba form. -- Robert
Re: Bangla(Bengali) letter Missing
Hello Ziaur RahmanKhando-ta does need special attention, including it in the standard wouldmake encoding it much easier.For those that don't know, khanda-ta is a special form of ta that is usedwhen ta has its inherent vowel suppressed. i.e. It is equivalent to 'tavirama'. It often occurs when final in a word, and also medial but neverinitial.Ta with a visible virama does not occur in any Bangladeshi word, 'khanda-ta'or plain 'ta' are always used in its place. However, 'Ta virama' may beneeded in educational texts and possibly in some foreign wordsIn the absence of khanda-ta being included in the standard, the followingrendering rules will need to be observed for the Bangla scriptThere are cases in Indic scripts where the Unicode standard states that a'explicit virama' character should be displayed. In such cases, if the baseconsonant is 'Bengali Letter Ta', Khanda-ta needs to be rendered instead ofthe expected 'ta_virama' i.e.Ta virama when final, is rendered as khanda-ta, andTa virama ZWNJ is rendered as khanda-taIn other words khanda-ta is to be considered the explicit virama form of taThe standard states that when a sequence such as 'consonant viramaconsonant' occurs, and there is no predefined conjunct formation* in thefont, the first consonant should rendered as a half form. As Bangla does notposses half forms the consonant should be displayed with a visible virama,soTa virama consonant (no defined form) is displayed as Ta Virama consonantTa virama ZWJ is displayed as Ta Virama*(In the example 'utsab' (festival), 'ts' is written as khando-ta sa. Here'khando-ta sa' needs to be considerd as a conjunct form i.e. defined in thefont.)Abdul- Original Message -From: Md Ziaur RahmanTo: Unicode ListSent: Thursday, July 27, 2000 7:24 AMSubject: Bangla(Bengali) letter MissingHi everyone,I am a Bangladeshi. Bangladesh is a country to the east of India. Bangla isour national language. Recently I checked the unicode standard 3.0 and foundthat a letter that is frequently used in Bangla is absent from the standard.It is Bangla letter Khondo-ta. .Can anyone tell me whether this letter is being considered for inclusion (Iassume that some other might have proposed for its inclusion). If not whatcan I do to propose its inclusion.My second headache is that Bangla should be used in the unicode standardinstead of Bengali. Bengali is misspelled so. Originali all bangali's (inWest bengal and Bangladesh) spell it as Bangla. What can I do to correct thespelling ?Thanks every body.Md Ziaur Rahman
Re: Bangla(Bengali) letter Missing
"Md Ziaur Rahman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ... found that a letter that is frequently used in Bangla is absent from the standard. It is Bangla letter Khondo-ta A more of a concen of mine is the lack of a 'Bengali letter Va' in the standard. Some Bangla texts make a distinction where a conjunt forms with ba and va. see http://www.btinternet.com/~abdulmalik/banglaglyphs.GIF How am I to encode the different forms in unicode? Also note the 'two symbols commonly found in Bangla fonts' - do these need to be included in the standard? Md Abdul Malik
RE: Bangla(Bengali) letter Missing
Brendan Murray wrote:> "Md Ziaur Rahman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > > ... found that a letter that is frequently used in Bangla is absent > from the standard. It is Bangla letter Khondo-ta > > I believe that this character is a composition of TA (U+09A4) and the> ZERO-WIDTH JOINER, the so-called "half-consonant", as opposed to being> a separate character. I believe that there should be a virama (halant) before, or in place of, the ZWJ: 1) U+09A4, U+09CD (B. LETTER TA, B. VIRAMA) shows as a "half ta" only when followed by another consonant. 2) U+09A4, U+09CD, U+200D (B. LETTER TA, B. VIRAMA, Z.W.J.) shows as a "half ta" even if no consonant follows. Form 1 is the one normally used; form 2 is a special hack, used when the glyph has to be shown in isolation (e.g. when writing about the script itself). _ Marco
Re: Bangla(Bengali) letter Missing
"Md Ziaur Rahman" <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > ... found that a letter that is frequently used in Bangla is absent from the standard. It is Bangla letter Khondo-ta I believe that this character is a composition of TA (U+09A4) and the ZERO-WIDTH JOINER, the so-called "half-consonant", as opposed to being a separate character. > ... Bangla should be used in the unicode standard instead of Bengali It probably should. However, historically the script has been called Bengali in English, and this is how the name was assigned. I can't remember the policies about script naming, but I believe this is not as inflexible as other aspects of the standard. B=
RE: Bangla(Bengali) letter Missing
Md Ziaur Rahman wrote: > [proposal omitted] > > My second headache is that Bangla should be used in the unicode > standard instead of Bengali. Bengali is misspelled so. Originali > all bangali's (in West bengal and Bangladesh) spell it as Bangla. > What can I do to correct the spelling ? Nothing, I'm afraid. The Unicode standard is full of things like this: many people would prefer the new Myanmar letters to be called Burmese, the term Tibetan is apparently offensive to the people of Nepal, the letter (U+01A2, U+01A3) named 'latin letter oi' should be called 'latin letter gha'. As for the spelling 'Bengali', it's the standard english spelling (my dictionary says from Hindi 'bangali' in the late 18th century) and although I'd guess people on this list would be familiar with the spelling 'Bangla', it's not widespread.
Bangla(Bengali) letter Missing
Hi everyone, I am a Bangladeshi. Bangladesh is a country to the east of India. Bangla is our national language. Recently I checked the unicode standard 3.0 and found that a letter that is frequently used in Bangla is absent from the standard. It is Bangla letter Khondo-ta. . Can anyone tell me whether this letter is being considered for inclusion (I assume that some other might have proposed for its inclusion). If not what can I do to propose its inclusion. My second headache is that Bangla should be used in the unicode standard instead of Bengali. Bengali is misspelled so. Originali all bangali's (in West bengal and Bangladesh) spell it as Bangla. What can I do to correct the spelling ? Thanks every body. Md Ziaur Rahman khonda-ta.bmp
