[smc-discuss] ചില്ലക്ഷരങ്ങളുടെ രാഷ്ട്രീയം

[Jayadevan Raja]

So Santhosh, the definition of (consonant + virama + ZWJ) <=> (Atomic
Chillu) does not exist in the current Unicode standard, leading to the
confusions, right? That is, is it correct to say that "*the crux of the
whole confusion lies in the absence of some essential equivalence
definitions in the standard*"?

Once Unicode defines this equivalence, the problems will be solved in
everywhere like Gnome (you have already resolved the issue), QT (as Sebin
said), Macintosh, Windows, International Components for Unicode, etcetera,
right?

2011/1/18 Santhosh Thottingal <santhosh.thottingal at gmail.com>

> 2011/1/18 Jayadevan Raja <jayadevanraja at gmail.com>:
> > @Santhosh: Your reply was really informative, detailed and excellent,
> > showing the major concerns of people who use unicode, around the world.
> >
> > But the implementation of Unicode string searches and comparisons in text
> > processing software must take into account the presence of equivalent
> code
> > points. In the absence of this feature, users searching for a particular
> > code point sequence would be unable to find other visually
> indistinguishable
> > glyphs that have a different, but canonically equivalent, code point
> > representation.
>
> Yes, Malayalam already has canonically equivalent code points and it
> is properly implemented in GNU/Linux.(I wrote that for GNU C library).
> Search and Collation on Malayalam works on GNU/Linux based on this
> rules.
> You can try this in your latest gnu/linux.
> eg:  കോ   ===  കേ + ാ  === ക + ോ
>
> Btw, AFAIK, MS windows does not implement this.
>
> >
> > So, aren't atomic chills and non-atomic (composite) chills in Malayalam
> > canonically equivalent?
>
> Canonical equivalence is not defined between both type of chillu
>
>
> >If we use "Normalization Form Canonical Composition"
> > everywhere, and consider the chills to be composite characters, isn't the
> > problem solved? Isn't the same issue there in almost all major scripts
> other
> > than basic Latin?
>
> Please read
> http://thottingal.in/blog/2008/06/02/canonical-equivalence-in-unicode-some-notes/
>
>
> Thanks
> Santhosh Thottingal
> _______________________________________________
> Swathanthra Malayalam Computing discuss Mailing List
> Project: https://savannah.nongnu.org/projects/smc
> Web: http://smc.org.in | IRC : #smc-project @ freenode
> discuss at lists.smc.org.in
> http://lists.smc.org.in/listinfo.cgi/discuss-smc.org.in
>
>


-- 
Thanking You,
Jayadevan V
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.smc.org.in/pipermail/discuss-smc.org.in/attachments/20110119/111ac235/attachment-0003.htm>