[MPEG-OTSPEC] Two GSUB Proposals for OFF: 'cabp' and 'hypy'

Thu Feb 29 23:25:33 CET 2024

Shouldn't we just use ruby? ruby under latn script and ZHS language, indicating "Ruby for Chinese written in Latin Script".
________________________________
From: mpeg-otspec <mpeg-otspec-bounces at lists.aau.at> on behalf of Takaaki Fuji 藤 貴亮 via mpeg-otspec <mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at>
Sent: Thursday, February 29, 2024 08:40
To: 陈永聪 <eisoch at 126.com>; Ken Lunde <lunde at unicode.org>; suzuki toshiya <mpsuzuki at hiroshima-u.ac.jp>
Cc: mpeg-otspec <mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at>
Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [MPEG-OTSPEC] Two GSUB Proposals for OFF: 'cabp' and 'hypy'

[You don't often get email from mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at. Learn why this is important at https://aka.ms/LearnAboutSenderIdentification ]

Dear Eiso, Ken, and Suzuki-san,

FYI, I found a writeup by Eric-san at https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.thetype.com%2F2017%2F08%2F11606%2F&data=05%7C02%7Crenzhi.li%40microsoft.com%7C2d47eda370b94c7a907c08dc39453ba1%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C638448217941389266%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=FL7qd5lH8gFctwfhKDLCJNvkVJdu4PJMFK%2Bhh8nK48Y%3D&reserved=0<https://www.thetype.com/2017/08/11606/> yesterday and it was a good introductory reading for me. Although I know I am not in the position to say something on this matter, I thought the fact that the ‘hypy’ proposal clearly discourages encoding Pinyin Forms as default would help most of the font developers (like us) not to get into the controversy in the first place ;)

Eiso, thank you for the info and I’ll get a copy of 现代汉语词典 just for future reference!

> highly-specialized fonts, such as those used for preparing official educational materials that may include a mixture of foreign words and Chinese words expressed in Pīnyīn, would benefit from it

Thank you for your insight as always Ken-san! I personally agree with your views, and I feel the recommendation that the proposal makes allows us to implement Pinyin Forms only for a selection of Chinese fonts, which are specialized for such educational purposes. That was the reason why I thought Eiso's proposal would be an improvement over the status quo. Apart from the spec, the substitutions could be implemented not only in the proposed ‘hypy’ but also in ‘ssXX’ as a compatibility stopgap, like we often do in Latin fonts for single-story a/g alternates.

BTW, another set of documents I had a look for curiosity were ISO 7098 and GB/T 16159 – the former seemed typeset with Cambria, while the latter looked similar to 现代汉语词典’s convention, but they just might not be the sources as official as 汉语拼音方案 or 现代汉语词典, which Eiso recommends.

Regards,

Takaaki Fuji

> On Feb 29, 2024, at 22:56, Ken Lunde <lunde at unicode.org> wrote:
>
> Fuji-san,
>
> I once discussed this very issue with notable typography Robert Bringhurst, which was almost 25 years ago. He imparted onto me a very useful gem of wisdom, specifically that transliteration and transcription systems are meant to facilitate communication, not hinder it, and imposing specific typographic conventions on what are considered to be insignificant typographic distinctions is counter-productive. This applies to the perceived directionality of the acute accent, and to the specific forms of lowercase a and g.
>
> My personal conclusion is that while conventional fonts need not adhere to the conventions that would be supported by the proposed 'hypy' feature, highly-specialized fonts, such as those used for preparing official educational materials that may include a mixture of foreign words and Chinese words expressed in Pīnyīn, would benefit from it. In other words, I would not oppose the registration of this particular layout feature, but its description should mention its highly-specialized usage.
>
> Eiso: About your reply to Fuji-san, it seems that even the official 汉语拼音方案 does not enforce these forms consistently. The 1958 version uses conventional a and g, but uses a directional acute accent mark:
>
> https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fwww.moe.gov.cn%2Fewebeditor%2Fuploadfile%2F2015%2F03%2F02%2F20150302165814246.pdf&data=05%7C02%7Crenzhi.li%40microsoft.com%7C2d47eda370b94c7a907c08dc39453ba1%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C638448217941398105%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=ipEbMQdomySsgdO7LRknAsBbYJ%2BR7aGFtuIEawE%2FHXM%3D&reserved=0<http://www.moe.gov.cn/ewebeditor/uploadfile/2015/03/02/20150302165814246.pdf>
>
> The 2012 revision shows only the single-story lowercase g:
>
> https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fedu.shandong.gov.cn%2Fattach%2F0%2Fb72295c44ff442c8b333a481f524dbe9.pdf&data=05%7C02%7Crenzhi.li%40microsoft.com%7C2d47eda370b94c7a907c08dc39453ba1%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C638448217941405027%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=mKKQPzlkoFb77wSRSZzb%2BoxusXEplR66ymxUdszAFz0%3D&reserved=0<http://edu.shandong.gov.cn/attach/0/b72295c44ff442c8b333a481f524dbe9.pdf>
>
> I also found this version:
>
> https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fjwc.qzc.edu.cn%2F_upload%2Farticle%2Ffiles%2Fff%2F32%2Fcc69a400496186407e64fa4338cc%2F232fc89a-19af-4b9c-a829-a936d8a8919b.pdf&data=05%7C02%7Crenzhi.li%40microsoft.com%7C2d47eda370b94c7a907c08dc39453ba1%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C638448217941410417%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=e63PhAxLVoae6XI8R7RJEFRyih7hEscjDZmzfHi3oSc%3D&reserved=0<https://jwc.qzc.edu.cn/_upload/article/files/ff/32/cc69a400496186407e64fa4338cc/232fc89a-19af-4b9c-a829-a936d8a8919b.pdf>
>
> It would be helpful if you could explain the discrepancies, and if there is a more current and official version, it would be helpful to see the actual document.
>
> Regards...
>
> -- Ken
>
>> On Feb 29, 2024, at 02:45, Takaaki Fuji 藤 貴亮 via mpeg-otspec <mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at> wrote:
>>
>> Dear Eiso,
>>
>> I'm just curious, but for ‘hypy’, is there any good source I can look at for the ‘official' glyph forms of Hanyu Pinyin?
>>
>> If I understand the issue correctly, ‘hypy’ is not only about the Futura-like one-story a/g shown in Example, but also the tone marks are preferred to have a 'reverse-modulation’; while an acute is always stroked from top to bottom as a Latin accent, as a Pinyin mark it goes upwards from left to right to illustrate the second/rising tone. I imagine this conflict/divergence has long been such an issue in a dual-script situation, so switching between the two via GSUB sounds like a great improvement to me!
>>
>> Thank you,
>>
>> Takaaki Fuji
>>
>>> On Feb 26, 2024, at 9:38, 陈永聪 via mpeg-otspec <mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at> wrote:
>>>
>>> This is my first proposal for OFF. Please see https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=http%3A%2F%2Fcloud.caaph.com%3A10121%2Ff%2Ffed7bd2e3d%2F&data=05%7C02%7Crenzhi.li%40microsoft.com%7C2d47eda370b94c7a907c08dc39453ba1%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C638448217941417027%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=FRTur53IcaLuNCUoGieWTBrgGH6QhChidC4DSxQsLqA%3D&reserved=0<http://cloud.caaph.com:10121/f/fed7bd2e3d/>
>>> I suggest adding two GSUB features. 'cabp' is used to support GB/Z 40637—2021, 'hypy' is used to support the special glyphs forms used for Hanyu Pinyin.
>>>
>>> If you have any suggestions or feedbacks, please let me know.
>>>
>>> Regards,
>>> Eiso_______________________________________________
>>> mpeg-otspec mailing list
>>> mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at
>>> https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.aau.at%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fmpeg-otspec&data=05%7C02%7Crenzhi.li%40microsoft.com%7C2d47eda370b94c7a907c08dc39453ba1%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C638448217941422251%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=P1AMSq2Gsi%2FKQrEjhkFd9C0A58UCjAHx1GAI%2FAiLhuk%3D&reserved=0<https://lists.aau.at/mailman/listinfo/mpeg-otspec>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> mpeg-otspec mailing list
>> mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at
>> https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.aau.at%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fmpeg-otspec&data=05%7C02%7Crenzhi.li%40microsoft.com%7C2d47eda370b94c7a907c08dc39453ba1%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C638448217941427945%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=Suvll7skstOQ%2BmlHQJ3N3zRNazZWRWtHydEFn18nAzg%3D&reserved=0<https://lists.aau.at/mailman/listinfo/mpeg-otspec>
>

_______________________________________________
mpeg-otspec mailing list
mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at
https://nam06.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Flists.aau.at%2Fmailman%2Flistinfo%2Fmpeg-otspec&data=05%7C02%7Crenzhi.li%40microsoft.com%7C2d47eda370b94c7a907c08dc39453ba1%7C72f988bf86f141af91ab2d7cd011db47%7C1%7C0%7C638448217941433679%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=CsR02VAkHNm64m8yfUmT3Pddq0PbJ%2F5GudG59l0346A%3D&reserved=0<https://lists.aau.at/mailman/listinfo/mpeg-otspec>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.aau.at/pipermail/mpeg-otspec/attachments/20240229/a7535843/attachment-0001.htm>