U+034F seems like a reasonable solution to prevent re-ordering. However we will probably need to include a way to key this character on Tibetan and Bhutanese keyboards - and find a way of explaining, in simple terms, to users why (and when) they need to insert this character.
Look-up tables in Tibetan fonts would also need updating - C On 18/08/2011, Richard Wordingham <richard.wording...@ntlworld.com> wrote: > On Tue, 16 Aug 2011 23:32:51 +0100 > Andrew West <andrewcw...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> 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). > > Isn't the position now that the correct encoding would be <0F43 0FB1 > 0FB1 0FB2 0FB2 0F74 0F74 034F 0F71>? If U+034F can prevent the > misordering of hiriq and patah in Hebrew (TUS Version 6.0 Section > 16.2), then it should be able to sort out the ordering of Tibetan > vowels. What does this stack abbreviate? > > I think U+034F is also the answer to distinguishing Tibetan <C, > I, U> and <C, U, I> abbreviations of <C, I, C, U> and <C, U, C, I> - > distinguish them as <C, I, U> and <C, U, U+034F, I>. > > Richard. > >
