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

Sat Mar 2 00:51:38 CET 2024

For the 'hypy' I think it's simply the Chinese language tag under the Latin
script. Any reason why not use that as is?

behdad
http://behdad.org/

On Fri, Mar 1, 2024 at 3:10 PM Peter Constable via mpeg-otspec <
mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at> wrote:

> For both of these proposed features, I’m also wondering why using existing
> stylistic set features wouldn’t be sufficient.
>
>
>
>
>
> Peter
>
>
>
> *From:* Hin-Tak Leung <htl10 at users.sourceforge.net>
> *Sent:* Friday, March 1, 2024 3:01 PM
> *To:* Peter Constable <pconstable at microsoft.com>; Ken Lunde <
> lunde at unicode.org>
> *Cc:* mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at
> *Subject:* Re: [MPEG-OTSPEC] [EXTERNAL] Re: Two GSUB Proposals for OFF:
> 'cabp' and 'hypy'
>
>
>
> Yes, sorry for derailing that discussion. This feature seems to be raised
> by one vendor for one intended usage, a relation with a national standard.
> There are a few existing feature tags of a similar nature (in Japanese for
> historical forms). I was just saying that it is somewhat strange to have
> features tags concerning the Latin glyphs and Latin diacritics in a Chinese
> font. (and also questioning the relation with the said national standard).
> IMO it is a specialised and perhaps even a vendor-specific feature... so I
> shall point the discussion back: is another vendor likely to want to ship a
> font with these feature tags?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Friday, 1 March 2024 at 18:34:37 GMT, Ken Lunde via mpeg-otspec <
> mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at> wrote:
>
>
>
>
>
> Peter,
>
> That is precisely why I explicitly stated that I had no strong objection
> to registering said feature, though that seemed to have become lost to the
> noise. In my mind, the question we should be asking is whether the number
> of fonts that would likely include this feature would rise to the level
> that it would make sense to register it, as opposed to simply using named
> character variant or stylistic set features for this purpose.
>
> Regards...
>
> -- Ken
>
> > On Feb 29, 2024, at 15:00, Peter Constable via mpeg-otspec <
> mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at> wrote:
> >
> > I’m not sure why standardization of transliteration conventions is being
> mentioned. An OT feature would simply be providing a way for content
> authors to access particular glyph variants from a font to suit their
> typographic preference.
> >  Peter
> >  From: mpeg-otspec <mpeg-otspec-bounces at lists.aau.at> on behalf of
> Hin-Tak Leung via mpeg-otspec <mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at>
> > Date: Thursday, February 29, 2024 at 3:56 PM
> > To: mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at <mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at>, suzuki toshiya
> <mpsuzuki at hiroshima-u.ac.jp>
> > Cc: Eiso CHAN <eisoch at 126.com>
> > Subject: [EXTERNAL] Re: [MPEG-OTSPEC] Two GSUB Proposals for OFF: 'cabp'
> and 'hypy'
> > That's especially true in mainland China where the teaching of spoken
> English is generally poor (and even deprecated) and subjected to local
> /personal variations. Not sure what is the intended audience of this kind
> of standardisation - is it for non-Chinese learning Chinese as a non-native
> language?
> >  There is also rumours that English is to be banned / deprecated / not
> taught in junior schools.
> >  On Thursday, 29 February 2024 at 22:44:16 GMT, Hin-Tak Leung via
> mpeg-otspec <mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at> wrote:
> >  For those who want to read the source material, it seems that the
> canonical sources for GBZ 40637 might be
> > https://www.chinesestandard.net/AMP/English.amp.aspx/GBZ40637-2021
> >
> https://openstd.samr.gov.cn/bzgk/gb/newGbInfo?hcno=52E2DE28D439C1937EE09AE4B5AA615B
> >  For the English and Chinese version of it respectively (behind pay
> walls), and a somewhat reliable Chinese version available for download at:
> >  https://archive.org/details/GB-Z40637-2021/page/n5/mode/1up
> >  I am mostly with Ken Lunde on this: transliteration itself is a
> work-around (trying to approximate one language's sound with another), and
> diacritics on transliteration is a refinement of a workaround... for actual
> scholarly work, the traditional way of indicating the pronunciation of a
> rare word in Chinese is to say "XY 切" where you indicates the starting
> consonant and the ending vowel with two common native words.e.g. my surname
> "梁"'s Cantonese pronunciation might be written down as "連揚切", where you
> take the consonant of the first (連"leen") and join with the ending vowel
> of another ("揚""yeung") to form "leung". Most people can't quite
> pronounce English "leung" correctly anyway, so the traditional way of
> annotating it as e.g. "連揚切" would be preferable... it is somewhat a lost
> cause to try to standardise on hyphenation and diacritics of
> transliterations...
> >  On Thursday, 29 February 2024 at 14:16:26 GMT, suzuki toshiya via
> mpeg-otspec <mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at> wrote:
> >  Dear Eiso, Fuji-san,
> >  I checked 現代漢語拼音方案2012 available at
> >
> http://edu.shandong.gov.cn/attach/0/b72295c44ff442c8b333a481f524dbe9.pdf
> >  I guess, the glyphs you want to care might be:
> >  "a" in "ai" (哀), "uan" (弯), "Van" (冤) in 韻母表
> > "g" in "ang" (昂), "eng" (亨的韵母), "ieng" (英), "ueng" (翁), "veng" (雍) in
> 韻母表
> >  Am I understanding correctly?
> >  漢語拼音方案1958 (I'm unsure the source of this scanned image):
> >
> http://www.moe.gov.cn/ewebeditor/uploadfile/2015/03/02/20150302165814246.pdf
> >  there is no clear distinction of the typeface for "a" & "g".
> >  A distinction of "a" is mentioned in the 四、声調符号, special "a" is used
> for 軽声,
> > maybe it would be the update introduced in 2012.
> >  But yet I'm unsure about the background to distinguish "g".
> >  Regards,
> > mpsuzuki
> >  On 2024/02/29 22:28, 陈永聪 via mpeg-otspec wrote:
> > > Fuji-San,
> > > > Thank you for your comments. The most official materials for Hanyu
> Pinyin forms are 汉语拼音方案and 现代汉语词典.
> > > > Eiso
> > > ---- Replied Message ----
> > >  From    Takaaki Fuji 藤 貴亮<tfuji at morisawa.co.jp><
> mailto:tfuji at morisawa.co.jp <tfuji at morisawa.co.jp>>
> > > Date    02/29/2024 下午6:45
> > > To      陈永聪 <eisoch at 126.com><mailto:eisoch at 126.com <eisoch at 126.com>>
> > > Cc      mpeg-otspec <mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at><
> mailto:mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at <mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at>>
> > > Subject Re: [MPEG-OTSPEC] Two GSUB Proposals for OFF: 'cabp' and 'hypy'
> > > 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
> 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://lists.aau.at/mailman/listinfo/mpeg-otspec
> > > _______________________________________________
> > mpeg-otspec mailing list
> > mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at
> > https://lists.aau.at/mailman/listinfo/mpeg-otspec
>
>
> > _______________________________________________
> > mpeg-otspec mailing list
> > mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at
> > https://lists.aau.at/mailman/listinfo/mpeg-otspec
> > _______________________________________________
> > mpeg-otspec mailing list
> > mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at
> > https://lists.aau.at/mailman/listinfo/mpeg-otspec
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> mpeg-otspec mailing list
> mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at
> https://lists.aau.at/mailman/listinfo/mpeg-otspec
> _______________________________________________
> mpeg-otspec mailing list
> mpeg-otspec at lists.aau.at
> https://lists.aau.at/mailman/listinfo/mpeg-otspec
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.aau.at/pipermail/mpeg-otspec/attachments/20240301/1cf7daa5/attachment-0001.htm>