Contents 1 Dot-Reph atomic encoding proposal 1.1 Current Status 1.2 Arguments 1.2.1 Dot-Reph is not same as Chillu-RA/RRA or <RA, VIRAMA> 1.2.1.1 Example 1 1.2.1.2 Example 2 1.3 Proposed Solution 1.3.1 Encode Dot-Reph atomically 1.3.1.1 Problems 1.4 Alternate Solution 1.4.1 Mandate Dot-Reph implementation in a font 2 Links

Dot-Reph atomic encoding proposal Edit

This was rejected by UTC on June 2007.

Current Status Edit

Unicode 5.0 says the Dot-Reph is <RA, VIRAMA, C>. This encoding produces following unacceptable results:

1. The word is rendered in a modern font as .
2. The word is rendered in a modern font as .

Instead of the current encoding, author proposes to encode Dot-Reph atomically to meet following objectives:

• A correct text written using traditional orthography font should get displayed in a modern orthography font (and vice verse) without spelling mistakes or unreadable rendering.

• Traditional writer should have the flexibility to mix Dot-Reph and Chillu-RA/RRA in the text without switching the font.

Arguments Edit

Dot-Reph is not same as Chillu-RA/RRA or <RA, VIRAMA> Edit

Dot-reph is not used in modern script. This does not mean that it has been replaced by Chillu-RA/RRA or <RA, VIRAMA>. Instead, modern script devised a different method (transcribe) to write words which had Dot-Reph in them.

Both of the following examples provide the evidence that, equivalences or fall-backs between Dot-Reph and Chillu-RA/RRA or <RA, VIRAMA> are not reliable.

Example 1 Edit

A traditional writer using old orthography font, writes /kaaryam/ (meaning: matter, subject) as: . All following potential fallbacks for a modern orthography font are incorrect:

• 
• 
• 

That is, the word should be rendered as in any type of font.

In this case, the transcribing of <RA, YA, YA> from old orthography to new is made as <RA, YA> to get കാര്യം.

Example 2 Edit

Suppose Dot-Reph is made equivalent to Chillu-RA/RRA and a young writer using modern font writes /paarvathi/ as . A person and using traditional (old orthography) font would see the incorrect rendering as while he expects .

In this case, the transcribing of <RA, VA, VA> from old orthography to new is made as <Chillu-RA/RRA, VA>.

Proposed Solution Edit

Encode Dot-Reph atomically Edit

As of now, there is no reliable mapping between Dot-Reph and Chillu-RA/RRA or RA_dead. Transcribing is the only option between traditional and modern texts. So the words with Dot-Reph should be displayed as it is, irrespective of the nature of font. That is guaranteed only by encoding Dot-Reph.

This will give complete control for the writer to choose the style he want. This paradigm is similar to the decision to independently encode Chillu-RA/RRA.

Problems Edit

Need to separate Dot-Reph from its base character RA and Chillu-RA/RRA.

Alternate Solution Edit

Mandate Dot-Reph implementation in a font Edit

Unicode can mandate a Dot-Reph implementation in a Malayalam font. Thus following produce Dot-Reph in any Malayalam font.

• <ര, VIRAMA, യ, VIRAMA, യ>
• <ര, VIRAMA, വ, VIRAMA, വ>
• <ര, VIRAMA, ദ, VIRAMA, ദ>
• ...

This would not conflict with Chillu-RA/RRA since it is being atomically encoded.

However, this could require joiners to encode <RA, VIRAMA, VA> and <RA, VIRAMA, YA> cases. Example for such manifestation is here in this scan:

Added by Cibu

Links Edit

• Comparison of 5.1.0 beta proposals