Vedic

[Antoine Leca]

Michael Everson wrote:
>
> A first draft is available at
> http://www.egt.ie/standards/iso10646/pdf/vedic-accents.pdf

Thanks, Michael.

A small point:
- there is a small problem with the table: the second column
 ought to begin with 097

- there was a post from Thomas Burke <84.3d1b029.26272537 at aol.com>
> Although upadhmaaniiya and jiihvaamuuliiya both have independent signs
> (termed gajakumbhaak*rti and vajraak*ti respectively [see Abhyankar's
> Dictionary of Sanskrit grammar, s.v., for details]), both these signs are
> commonly replaced by yet a third sign, the ardhavisarga, in grammatical texts
> printed in Nagari. If we are properly to quote these texts, without editorial
> intervention, we need the ardhavisarga in addition to the signs for
> upadhmaaniiya and jiihvaamuuliiya.  Three characters, in all, are thus
> required.

Why do you believe about these?

- did I guess correctly about the kampa (to be encoded resp.
 \u0966\u0953\u0952 and \u0968\u0953\u0952) ?

- more generally: some (many?) of these accents differ mainly by the
 context more than by the meaning: so it may appear that we diverge
 from the conventional "Unicode codepoints=character alias meaning"
 toward a more glyph-based approach (which approached seemed to be
 the one used by ISCII-91, BTW)


Best regards,
Antoine