Difference between revisions of "WX notation"

From Apertium
Jump to navigation Jump to search
Line 2: Line 2:
   
 
==Table==
 
==Table==
  +
  +
==Details==
  +
  +
<anudev> there r some issues of assigning some letters of hindi with Unicode
  +
<anudev> still unresolved
  +
<anudev> actually there is the issue of separate vowels and matras
  +
<avinesh_> could u give an example
  +
<anudev> we don't need the vowels and matras(markers) differently
  +
<avinesh_> because for every matra there is a mapping in wx
  +
<anudev> like a, aa, ii, u r there
  +
<avinesh_> yeah
  +
<anudev> but again ी ू े
  +
<anudev> are not needed
  +
<spectie> matras = ?
  +
<avinesh_> matra is the later representation
  +
<anudev> matras= markers
  +
<anudev> ka
  +
<anudev> kaa
  +
<anudev> we will write kaa as kA in wx
  +
<anudev> in unicode there is a separate place for both A and the marker aa
  +
<anudev> we need a same code for both of them,
  +
<avinesh_> sry still not getting ur point why should we use wx instead of unicode?
  +
<avinesh_> but people only follow one convention either the A or aa
  +
<avinesh_> not both
  +
<avinesh_> i mean if u see a document
  +
<avinesh_> it will generally be consistent
  +
<anudev> I mean we write A for both the vowel and matra
  +
<avinesh_> oh..
  +
<avinesh_> ok
  +
<avinesh_> got it
  +
<anudev> but unicode will write differently for A as a vowel and matra
  +
<avinesh_> k got it
  +
<anudev> so it creates unnecessary complication
  +
<spectie> so the problem is that in unicode
  +
<spectie> combining characters have a separate code point
  +
<spectie> and in WX they are unified to one code point?
  +
<spectie> = letter
  +
<anudev> yes
  +
<spectie> why not use unicode normalisation ?
  +
</pre>
   
 
==Examples==
 
==Examples==

Revision as of 12:09, 28 March 2009

WX notation is used to represent the Devanagari alphabet, used by Hindi, Nepali, Marathi, Bengali and many other Indian languages in ASCII.

Table

Details

<anudev> there r some issues of assigning some letters of hindi with Unicode <anudev> still unresolved <anudev> actually there is the issue of separate vowels and matras <avinesh_> could u give an example <anudev> we don't need the vowels and matras(markers) differently <avinesh_> because for every matra there is a mapping in wx <anudev> like a, aa, ii, u r there <avinesh_> yeah <anudev> but again ी ू े <anudev> are not needed <spectie> matras = ? <avinesh_> matra is the later representation <anudev> matras= markers <anudev> ka <anudev> kaa <anudev> we will write kaa as kA in wx <anudev> in unicode there is a separate place for both A and the marker aa <anudev> we need a same code for both of them, <avinesh_> sry still not getting ur point why should we use wx instead of unicode? <avinesh_> but people only follow one convention either the A or aa <avinesh_> not both <avinesh_> i mean if u see a document <avinesh_> it will generally be consistent <anudev> I mean we write A for both the vowel and matra <avinesh_> oh.. <avinesh_> ok <avinesh_> got it <anudev> but unicode will write differently for A as a vowel and matra <avinesh_> k got it <anudev> so it creates unnecessary complication <spectie> so the problem is that in unicode <spectie> combining characters have a separate code point <spectie> and in WX they are unified to one code point? <spectie> = letter <anudev> yes <spectie> why not use unicode normalisation ?

Examples

  • राम = र्+आ+म्+अ (rAma)
  • कृष्ण = क्+ऋ+ष्+ण्+अ (kqRNa)

External links