Re: Non-standard Tibetan stacks (was Re: Sanskrit nasalized L)

[Christopher Fynn]

You can find quite a few "non-standard" stacks (those used in Tibetan
abbreviations) in the book བསྡུ་ཡིག་གསེར་གྱི་ཨ་ལོང།  which is freely
available in PDF format from


- Chris

On 17/08/2011, Asmus Freytag  wrote:
> On 8/16/2011 3:32 PM, Andrew West wrote:
>> On 16 August 2011 18:19, Asmus Freytag  wrote:
 "These stacks are highly unusual and are considered beyond the scope
 of plain text rendering. They may be handled by higher-level
 mechanisms".
>>> The question is: have any such "mechanisms" been defined and deployed by
>>> anyone?
>> In my opinion, until someone produces a scan of a Tibetan text with
>> multiple consonant-vowel sequences, and asks how they can represent it
>> in plain Unicode text there is no question to be answered.
>
> Thank you Andrew - that clarifies the issue for the non-specialist.
>
> A./
>
>>
>> Chris Fynn asked about certain non-standard stacks he was trying to
>> implement in the Tibetan Machine Uni font in an email to the Tibex
>> list on 2006-12-09, but these didn't involve multiple consonant-vowel
>> sequences (one stack sequence was<0F43 0FB1 0FB1 0FB2 0FB2 0F74 0F74
>> 0F71>  which would be reordered to<0F42 0FB7 0FB1 0FB1 0FB2 0FB2 0F71
>> 0F74 0F74>  by normalization which would display differently).
>>
>> Other non-standard stacks that I have seen involve horizontal
>> progression within the vertical stack (e.g. yang written horizontally
>> in a vertical stack).
>>
>> More recently, the user community needed help digitizing Tibetan texts
>> that used the superfixed letters U+0F88 and U+0F89 within non-standard
>> stacks, resulting in a proposal to encode additional letters
>> (http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/n3568.pdf).
>>
>> None of these non-standard stack use cases involved multiple
>> consonant-vowel sequences, and I'm not sure whether I have ever seen
>> an example of such a sequence.  I have learnt that there is little
>> point discussing a solution for a hypothetical problem, because when
>> the real problems arise they likely to be something different.
>>
>> Andrew
>>
>
>
>

Re: Non-standard Tibetan stacks (was Re: Sanskrit nasalized L)

[Asmus Freytag]

On 8/16/2011 3:32 PM, Andrew West wrote:

On 16 August 2011 18:19, Asmus Freytag  wrote:

"These stacks are highly unusual and are considered beyond the scope
of plain text rendering. They may be handled by higher-level
mechanisms".

The question is: have any such "mechanisms" been defined and deployed by
anyone?

In my opinion, until someone produces a scan of a Tibetan text with
multiple consonant-vowel sequences, and asks how they can represent it
in plain Unicode text there is no question to be answered.


Thank you Andrew - that clarifies the issue for the non-specialist.

A./



Chris Fynn asked about certain non-standard stacks he was trying to
implement in the Tibetan Machine Uni font in an email to the Tibex
list on 2006-12-09, but these didn't involve multiple consonant-vowel
sequences (one stack sequence was<0F43 0FB1 0FB1 0FB2 0FB2 0F74 0F74
0F71>  which would be reordered to<0F42 0FB7 0FB1 0FB1 0FB2 0FB2 0F71
0F74 0F74>  by normalization which would display differently).

Other non-standard stacks that I have seen involve horizontal
progression within the vertical stack (e.g. yang written horizontally
in a vertical stack).

More recently, the user community needed help digitizing Tibetan texts
that used the superfixed letters U+0F88 and U+0F89 within non-standard
stacks, resulting in a proposal to encode additional letters
(http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/n3568.pdf).

None of these non-standard stack use cases involved multiple
consonant-vowel sequences, and I'm not sure whether I have ever seen
an example of such a sequence.  I have learnt that there is little
point discussing a solution for a hypothetical problem, because when
the real problems arise they likely to be something different.

Andrew

Non-standard Tibetan stacks (was Re: Sanskrit nasalized L)

[Andrew West]

On 16 August 2011 18:19, Asmus Freytag  wrote:
>> "These stacks are highly unusual and are considered beyond the scope
>> of plain text rendering. They may be handled by higher-level
>> mechanisms".
>
> The question is: have any such "mechanisms" been defined and deployed by
> anyone?

In my opinion, until someone produces a scan of a Tibetan text with
multiple consonant-vowel sequences, and asks how they can represent it
in plain Unicode text there is no question to be answered.

Chris Fynn asked about certain non-standard stacks he was trying to
implement in the Tibetan Machine Uni font in an email to the Tibex
list on 2006-12-09, but these didn't involve multiple consonant-vowel
sequences (one stack sequence was <0F43 0FB1 0FB1 0FB2 0FB2 0F74 0F74
0F71> which would be reordered to <0F42 0FB7 0FB1 0FB1 0FB2 0FB2 0F71
0F74 0F74> by normalization which would display differently).

Other non-standard stacks that I have seen involve horizontal
progression within the vertical stack (e.g. yang written horizontally
in a vertical stack).

More recently, the user community needed help digitizing Tibetan texts
that used the superfixed letters U+0F88 and U+0F89 within non-standard
stacks, resulting in a proposal to encode additional letters
(http://std.dkuug.dk/jtc1/sc2/wg2/docs/n3568.pdf).

None of these non-standard stack use cases involved multiple
consonant-vowel sequences, and I'm not sure whether I have ever seen
an example of such a sequence.  I have learnt that there is little
point discussing a solution for a hypothetical problem, because when
the real problems arise they likely to be something different.

Andrew