-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 0
New issue
Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.
By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.
Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account
GUNJALA GONDI VIRAMA behaves inconsistently with the Unicode Standard’s current definition #3
Comments
@lianghai : Thank you |
Quoting Ek Type’s preliminary response on Instagram:
|
Does the Unicode Standard specify what form the "artificial placeholder" should take? If not, then this behaviour is not technically inconsistent... But I take your point. If a visible virama is needed and later encoded, then having this here is a problem. I don't know how to best balance the needs of users and the standards compliance issue, particularly since there isn't a visible Gunja Gondi virama on the horizon. |
This bug has been open for three years, and we have not seen any proposals for a visible virama. The "ongoing investigation" into half forms, as far as I can tell, never got a response. You said in your question to Ek Type that "the situation is getting problematic". What problems have you noticed in practice? |
Font
NotoSansGunjalaGondi-Regular.otf
Where the font came from, and when
Site: https://github.com/googlefonts/noto-fonts/blob/master/phaseIII_only/unhinted/otf/NotoSansGunjalaGondi/NotoSansGunjalaGondi-Regular.otf
Date: 2020-06-01
Font Version
1.001
OS name and version
macOS Catalina 10.15.5 (19F96) —However, the font was tested in a HarfBuzz environment. See the next section.
Application name and version
FontGoggles 1.1.15
Issue
The Unicode Standard currently defines U+11D97 GUNJALA GONDI VIRAMA as having
Indic_Syllabic_Category = Invisible_Stacker
, which is based on the encoding proposal. This property value suggests the character is purely artificial and is only used to form conjuncts, not having a visible form for killing the inherent vowel of a consonant letter. In the font, the character behaves like an ISCII virama instead.If an overt virama/halant is deemed needed by the script, a proposal should be submitted to the Unicode Technical Committee. A new character will be likely preferred at this point for this behavior. Unilaterally producing fonts with an innovative behavior is harmful to text exchange, and often eventually leads to unideal patches in the Unicode Standard to address the incompatibility.
Note there is also an ongoing investigation on a related issue (regarding how standalone half forms may be needed): UTC Action Item 162-A59
Character data
𑵺 𑵺𑶗 𑵺𑶗𑵺
See the section “Screenshot” for code points and character names.
Screenshot
Fyi, the following is hb-shape (HarfBuzz) 2.6.6’s output:
[Na.GGondi=0+650|space=1+270|NaHalant.GGondi=2+650|space=4+270|NaHalf.GGondi=5+620|Na.GGondi=7+650]
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: