Anonymous

Changes

From SMC Wiki

CDAC-IDN-Critique

3 bytes added, 07:45, 5 December 2010
# The variant table is defined based on random glyphs taken from a list of 900+ possible glyphs for Malayalam. No explanation is given on how two entries in variant table become homo morphs. One entry in variant table is just because of the fact that one is mirror image of other. Since b, d are not excluded from English, there's no need to exclude mirror imaged glyphs in variant table.
#: CDAC's Response: The IDN system devised for Malayalam is based only on the modern script. It doesn't address the old script or the fonts based on old script. Also, a detailed study was done before proposing homographs in each of the languages. The study included observing the visual form of the conjunct in the point size of the Address bars of major browsers. The mirror imaged nature of the glyphs was not the criterion for the two glyphs to be qualified as variants.
#:: Since CDAC took that much effort to check visual spoofing, i just like to know the basic glyph set in modern orthography of Malayalam --[[User:Jinesh.k|Jinesh.k]] 06:26, 4 December 2010 (PST)
# Visually identical glyphs are not the only entries to be considered for the variant table. Unicode chart itself has ambiguous dual representations for the same code point without canonical equivalence. An example for this is au signs in Tamil and Malayalam. ௗ- ௌ and ൗ - ൌ . The document does not consider these special cases.
#: CDAC's Response: The IDN policy does not permit the entry of syllables having structure CMM or MCM, where M stands for Matra or vowel sign. The ABNF rules takes care of this.
#:: ൗ - ൌ are neither CMM nor MCM case. It is single code pointed Mathra(vowel signs), appearing with consonants in CM format alone. [[User:സന്തോഷ്|സന്തോഷ്]] 09:03, 2 December 2010 (PST)
# There are different orthographic forms for many glyphs in Malayalam. The variant table does not address different scenarios arising while considering the visual similarity. For example in traditional orthography TTA is written in stacked form (റ്റ). While in modern orthography it can be written in non-stacked form and this non-stacked form is visually identical to two RA sequence (ററ).
#:CDAC's Response : Only the stacked form is considered to be the conjunct TTA in modern orthography.
#:: i don't really understand the logic. A normal user is easily spoofed with റ്റ and ററ. If we go by CDAC's logic another inorganic standardisation will be the result --[[User:Jinesh.k|Jinesh.k]] 06:26, 4 December 2010 (PST)
=== ABNF rules ===