[Neobrahmigp] IP-Response-on-Devanagari LGR Proposal

Uma Maheshwar G guraohyd at gmail.com
Mon Apr 30 17:02:59 UTC 2018


Dear Akshat, Congratulations for the realization of the final version with
all the accessories.    I am sure Devanagari LGR would remain a model for
all NBGP LGRs.  I went through it with a great interest.    It may not be
out of date if I can raise a point that needs some clarification.

Sorry for this late observation: In my view the following requires to be
reviewed in Devanagari LGR.

Comment on WLE rule in Devanagari LGR:

In the presence of the following Rule

                        2. H: must be preceded by C or CN of WLE rules:

the Rule:  “7. V: Can *NOT *be preceded by H (details in "Case of V
preceded by H") “ is only redundant or vacuous and in my view it shall be
with drawn.

Rule 2. Can be interpreted as  cases like syllables of CH, CNH are valid
and all other, such as *VH, *XH, MH, BH, DH are invalid and similarly, *HV,
*HC, *HCN, *HM, *HB, *HD are also invalid. Thus, the outcome of the rule 7
i.e. *HV is redundant.

And if this is true then the sub list of valid and invalid labels as per
the WLE rules of the following shall be withdrawn.

#Valid - Case of "V: Can NOT be preceded by H (details in "Case of V
preceded by H")"

Since the Devanagari LGR stands as the reference model for all other
Indian  LGRs it needs to be cleared of such redundancy.

                                         The following cases hardly
occur and hardly acceptable.
                              #Invalid - Case of "V: Can NOT be
preceded by H (details in "Case of V preceded by H")"

आम्अचार  a compound where the Halant is unnecessary.

स्वागत्आपका  two words in sequence, where the first word must end by a
boundary.   -gurao


On Sun, Apr 29, 2018 at 11:49 PM, Akshat Joshi <akshatj at cdac.in> wrote:

> [image: Boxbe] <https://www.boxbe.com/overview> This message is eligible
> for Automatic Cleanup! (akshatj at cdac.in) Add cleanup rule
> <https://www.boxbe.com/popup?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.boxbe.com%2Fcleanup%3Fkey%3DXN6dKRElBCyiPAt%252FFTUmGtWRLzHDsdvHMPnQyTzkPoQ%253D%26token%3D9lXTtwarojvbk%252FxRGpNe%252BcLLU6XNUBVS5i6kwB8zKKb6E7sYqrcjP6gg57CF9jODPvd8nSmTeJzEorLxx5qNHl56gLCkxtDrEN2NAmcyud2jAeYfA%252FCFGIG3VWGg1zVbnE9o3frkIBQ%253D&tc_serial=38806315790&tc_rand=903606422&utm_source=stf&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ANNO_CLEANUP_ADD&utm_content=001>
> | More info
> <http://blog.boxbe.com/general/boxbe-automatic-cleanup?tc_serial=38806315790&tc_rand=903606422&utm_source=stf&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ANNO_CLEANUP_ADD&utm_content=001>
>
> Dear All,
>
> Please find attached, modified Devanagari LGR document with all the
> changes as suggested by IP accommodated/responded to. This is accompanied
> with following files.
> 1. Devanagari LGR modified XML file. ( modified as per IP feedback and
> additional Bengali cross-script variants)
> 2. Test Labels file (with more labels covering almost entire
> character-set, all the exclusion code-points) (Thanks to Neha Gupta for
> this.)
> 3. A separate file that contains the labels that produce variants.
> 4. Response to IP for each of the individual changes suggested by them.
>
> As discussed during the F2F I have added the possible Bengali cross-script
> variants in Devanagari.
>
> Additional text regarding ZWJ and ZWNJ has also been added which can (and
> most probably should) be used by all the other script LGRs (Last paragraph
> of Point 4.1.2.1 ii)
>
> Gurumukhi variants have also been harmonized and the tables updated
> accordingly.
>
> A short paragraph describing the process of harmonization of cross-script
> variants has also been added at the end of the point 6.5.
>
> While we await the responses on the mailing list for extensive
> cross-script analysis of other scripts with Devanagari (I have already
> heard from Malayalam, Tamil, Telugu, Gurmukhi, Bengali and Gujarati about
> not having any additional cases of cross-script variants) I have already
> added the line in Devanagari LGR that no cases were found. As I am
> travelling from tomorrow onwards for a week, I may have limited
> connectivity hence sending in advance. Once we get confirmation from all
> the scripts (which we most probably will), I request co-chairs to consider
> as a submission to IP.
>
> Regards,
> Akshat Joshi
>
> On March 30, 2018 at 11:44 PM Sarmad Hussain <sarmad.hussain at icann.org>
> wrote:
>
> Dear Akshat,
>
> Please find attached the following:
>
> 1) IP response for Devanagari (Proposal of 2018-01-30)
> 2) LGR proposal, as originally sent
> 3) Current associated XML
>
> You are requested to kindly consider the feedback and update the proposal
> accordingly.  Please let us know if you have any queries.
>
> Regards,
> Sarmad
>
>
>
>
>
>
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
> [ C-DAC is on Social-Media too. Kindly follow us at:
> Facebook: https://www.facebook.com/CDACINDIA & Twitter: @cdacindia ]
>
> This e-mail is for the sole use of the intended recipient(s) and may
> contain confidential and privileged information. If you are not the
> intended recipient, please contact the sender by reply e-mail and destroy
> all copies and the original message. Any unauthorized review, use,
> disclosure, dissemination, forwarding, printing or copying of this email
> is strictly prohibited and appropriate legal action will be taken.
> ------------------------------------------------------------
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> Neobrahmigp mailing list
> Neobrahmigp at icann.org
> https://mm.icann.org/mailman/listinfo/neobrahmigp
>
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://mm.icann.org/pipermail/neobrahmigp/attachments/20180430/5b1bc3fb/attachment-0001.html>


More information about the Neobrahmigp mailing list