Re: Sinhala GNU/Linux

From: harshula <email-not-shown>
Date: Sun Dec 05 2004 - 18:50:24 LKT
To: Donald Gaminitillake
Cc: Anuradha Ratnaweera <email-not-shown>, Delan Silva <lakfoil@slt.lk>

Hi Donald,

Set A = Set A1 Union Set A2 Union Set A3 = 0d80-0dff

Set B = 200C-200D

Set C = Cartesian product of A2 and A3

(Set C2 = Union of C and A2)

Set D = a subset of the Cartesian product of B, A3, A2 and C2

You seem to be very interested in Set B, so I assume you already understand and acknowledge Set C, as it's derivable from Set A2 and A3.

Set B consists of two elements, the magical ZWNJ and ZWJ: http://www.unicode.org/charts/PDF/U2000.pdf

Regards,
Harshula

On Sun, 2004-12-05 at 17:27 +0600, Donald Gaminitillake wrote:
> Dear Harshula
>
> I must get the things in right order
>
> SLS 1134 = Unicode range 0d80-0dff = set A (is this correct)
>
> You have defined this as set A.
>
> You have defined a set B = 200C - 200D
>
>
> I do have the set A and "a" is 0D85 and I know every character
> location up to 0dff.
>
> Can you give me the images of set B or a URL to down load it.
>
>
> Best
>
> Donald

• Message -------- From: harshula <email-not-shown> To: Donald Gaminitillake Cc: Anuradha Ratnaweera <email-not-shown>, Delan Silva <lakfoil@slt.lk> Subject: Re: Sinhala GNU/Linux Date: Sun, 05 Dec 2004 19:48:57 +1100 Hi Donald,

You seem to be confused. You need to read my email again.

I explicitly stated that:

---

I assert that the Unicode code range:

0d80-0dff (hereby referred to as Set A1, A2 and A3)

and

200C-200D (hereby referred to as Set B)

allows us to encode the Sinhala letters.

...

In our case it is roughly the union of:

• A1
• A2
• C (= Cartesian product of A2 and A3)
• D (= a subset of the Cartesian product of B, A3, A2 and C2 (C2 = Union of C and A2))

This union produces a set of encodings containing all the basic elements (letters).

---

So once you understand and acknowledge the existence of Set C and D, then we can continue our discussion. If you do not understand the mathematical terms, please tell me, and I'll find an explanation for you.

What you wrote in your email does not even remotely correspond to what I wrote. I have taken the liberty to attach my email to the bottom of this email, as you seem to have replied to Anuradha's email and not mine.

Regards,
Harshula Received on Sun Dec 05 23:50:24 2004