Yes; it is now available as L2/19-348 <http://www.unicode.org/cgi-bin/GetMatchingDocs.pl?L2/19-348>.
On Sun, Oct 6, 2019 at 11:03 PM Asmus Freytag (c) <asm...@ix.netcom.com> wrote: > Have you submitted that response as a UTC document? > A./ > > On 10/6/2019 2:08 PM, Cibu wrote: > > Thanks for addressing this. Here is my response: > https://docs.google.com/document/d/1K6L82VRmCGc9Fb4AOitNk4MT7Nu4V8aKUJo_1mW5X1o/ > > In summary, my take is: > > The sequence <NA, VIRAMA, RRA> for ൻ്റ (<<chillu N, subscript RRA>>) > should not be legitimized as an alternate encoding; but should be > recognized as a prevailing non-standard legacy encoding. > > > On Sun, Oct 6, 2019 at 7:57 PM 梁海 Liang Hai <liang...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Folks, >> >> (Microsoft Peter and Andrew, search for “Windows” in the document.) >> >> (Asmus, in the document there’s a section 5, *ICANN RZ-LGR situation*—let >> me know if there’s some news.) >> >> This is a pretty straightforward document about the notoriously >> problematic encoding of Malayalam <*chillu n*, bottom-side sign of *rra*>. >> I always wanted to properly document this, so finally here it is: >> >> L2/19-345 <http://www.unicode.org/cgi-bin/GetMatchingDocs.pl?L2/19-345> >> *Alternative encodings for Malayalam "nta"* >> Liang Hai >> 2019-10-06 >> >> >> Unfortunately, as <NA, VIRAMA, RRA> has already become the de facto >> standard encoding, now we have to recognize it in the Core Spec. It’s a bit >> like another Tamil *srī* situation. >> >> An excerpt of the proposal: >> >> Document the following widely used encoding in the Core Specification as >> an alternative representation for Malayalam [glyph] (<chillu n, bottom-side >> sign of rra>) that is a special case and does not suggest any productive >> rule in the encoding model: >> >> <U+0D28 ന MALAYALAM LETTER NA, U+0D4D ◌് MALAYALAM SIGN >> VIRAMA, U+0D31 റ MALAYALAM LETTER RRA> >> >> >> Best, >> 梁海 Liang Hai >> https://lianghai.github.io >> >> >