From dmulholl@cs.indiana.edu Sun Mar 26 14:07:24 1995 Received: from moose.cs.indiana.edu by whale.cs.indiana.edu (5.65c/9.4jsm) id AA00939; Sun, 26 Mar 1995 14:07:24 -0500 Received: from flute.cs.indiana.edu by moose.cs.indiana.edu (5.65c/9.4jsm) id AA26828; Sun, 26 Mar 1995 14:07:22 -0500 Received: by flute.cs.indiana.edu (5.65c/9.4jsm) id AA25292; Sun, 26 Mar 1995 14:07:21 -0500 Date: Sun, 26 Mar 1995 14:07:21 -0500 From: "Daniel Yaqob" To: dmulholl@cs.indiana.edu, fisseha@gerbil.cig.mot.com, ybf2u@curry.edschool.virginia.edu, ybf2u@virginia.edu Subject: ATTN: App-B Updates! Status: R selam, I have made some small changes in the proposal. In Appendix A I have substituted "ETHIOPIAN VOWEL" for "ETHIOPIAN CONSONANT" in a few places. Actually I would like to change ETHIOPIAN to FIDEL and make the proposal refer to a script (fidel) and not a nation that uses the script (Ethiopia). I believe this would concur with how other multinational scripts are treated -i.e. "arabic" and "latin" are not names of nations. Again silence = approval :-) Also there is now a references page that you can get to by clicking the name "Desta" in the document. > one hand, I know they do not see any need to bring in rendering > issues into the design of the overall proposal. These are details Perhaps "RENDERING ETHIOPIAN SCRIPT AT KEY ENTRY LEVEL" is not a good title for Appendix B? To me, "rendering" is more associated with how the hardware, or software and hardware together, draw the image of a character on the screen. I do recall that an issue Abass wanted to address was that rendering should NOT be done by superimposing a diacritical glyph on top of a ge'ez form letter. The introductions of both proposals I think handle that issue in their own way. Would "Ethiopic Input for Latin Keyboards" be a more descriptive / less misleading title? > I must confess, however, that I am not able to uderstand the writing Appendix B very > well. I was expecting something more like the SERA system--just showing how we have > mapped the fidel onto ASCII. I believe this is done. In example a sera mapping is shown: 0070 LATIN SMALL LETTER P = 1375 ETHIOPIAN p | 1355 ETHIOPIAN P Here the mapping indicated is p = \p and P = \P The | mark indicates the "Shift" key. In the old appendix B there are several "|" given under some keys, so "|" may also imply a Control or Alt key is used in combination with the letter key. Should we add a line to state explicitly that | = Shift ? I think it wouldn't hurt. Appendix B part 2 is very difficult for me to understand. Why is it there? What does it do/say? Looking at the old version I don't see how the address in the table correspond to anything else in the table. For example: Second Order (Ka'b-bate) 1248 ETHIOPIAN UEA Appedix A of the old proposal says address 1248 = "SHAE", unless a misprint is in the HTML version (I will check tonight). I believe the table in part 2 was to indicate what latin keys would be used to specify the consonant orders. In which case it should be rewritten. Opinions? > Aren't we, ultimately, just saying that an efficient mapping can be created using > a Latin keyboard? I am not sure, but maybe that's what Appendix B is saying, only > in another way. Yes. Reviewing the old Appendix B, to the best that I can gather, the purpose of the appendix was to say "A Latin mapping is necessary and here's how...". I think we should settle on the purpose of Appendix B and then look back and see if it does the job we have determined for it. Suggested Purpose: danEl) To present `a' possible mapping of fidel onto a latin keyboard with discussion sufficient to describe the compose sequences necessary for entry of the syllabic orders. yTna) yonas) all for now, -dan'El