Missing Old Hungarian diacritics

dscorbett commented 5 years ago

Font

NotoSansOldHungarian-Regular.ttf

Where the font came from, and when

Site: https://github.com/googlei18n/noto-fonts/blob/d7af81e614086435102cca95961b141b3530a027/hinted/NotoSansOldHungarian-Regular.ttf Date: 2018-10-31

Font version

Version 2.000;GOOG;noto-source:20181019:f8f3770

Issue

Noto Sans Old Hungarian is missing some diacritics. Modern Old Hungarian is in flux and there have been multiple competing proposals, some of which extend the character set with diacritics.

According to http://nyelvmuveles.hu/osi-magyar-iras-rovas/27, U+0304 COMBINING MACRON was proposed in 1903 to mark long vowels, and U+0307 COMBINING DOT ABOVE was recently proposed to distinguish /e/ from /eː/.

According to https://web.archive.org/web/20190505131414/http://nyelvmuveles.hu/elveink/tanuljunk-konnyen-rovasirni-%E2%80%93-koszonet-raduly-janosnak-a-bolcs-megoldasert, U+0301 COMBINING ACUTE ACCENT was also proposed to mark long vowels.

According to L2/11-242R, U+1DC4 COMBINING MACRON-ACUTE is a duplicating mark.

ghost commented 3 years ago

@dscorbett David, The Old Hungarian script was leaded in 2014 to UNICODE. On the next year the MSZ (the Hungarian standardization organization) adopted the Old Hungarian script according UNICODE standard, without modifications. I dropped an e-mail to András Tisza (or as Hungarians write: Tisza András), who was there during the standardization. He send me a copy of the document about standardization from the year 2015, by the MSZ. Here is it: 160378C_rovid.pdf I think, this speaks for itself, no more debute required.

ghost commented 3 years ago

@google-admin @marekjez86 This issue doesn't follow the UNICODE standards and the Hungarian standards (MSZ) about Old Hungarian script, wich describe same facts. The UNICODE Old Hungarian standard chart downloadable from page http://unicode.org/charts from the European section. David Corbett refer that kind of documents, which weren't leaded in, just archived, or dubious sources, like http://nyelvmuveles.hu (the page http://nyelvmuveles.hu does not only override the standard, it wants to override the latin based Hungarian spelling, too. This page isn't an official page) He, David, refer that kind of document too, which dated 2012, and highligts several pictures only, what would justify him, on his opinion, do it on that kind of way, that doesn't read, what are written in the document. The Old Hungarian script was leaded in as UNICODE standard in 2014, and adopted by Hungarian Standardization Organization (MSZ) in 2015, too. If this Issue won't be closed, it is doubtful Google's Noto project's purpose, I think about developing all UNICODE standard charsets, because he wants to allowe that kind of letters, which override the UNICODE standard. I repeate myself again: the official UNICODE adopted charts page is http://unicode.org/charts The UNICODE's Old Hungarian script standard's codepoints are u10c80 to u10cff, with several reserved points. The standard Old Hungarian script doesn't use above acute or above dot(s).

dscorbett commented 3 years ago

I recommend that the Google Fonts team ignore any comments that misrepresent what Unicode standardizes, and any comments that quibble over ancillary details instead of addressing evidence directly. If anyone other than @Kixidevel has any questions or comments about my claims, I’d be happy to answer them.

ghost commented 3 years ago

@google-admin @marekjez86 The adopted Old Hungarian charset by UNICODE is downloadable from http://unicode.org/charts from European section. There aren't characters with above acute or above dot(s). Please, follow the standards.

ghost commented 3 years ago

@google-admin @marekjez86 The adopted Old Hungarian script charset by UNICODE standard's chart full path is the following: https://unicode.org/charts/PDF/U10C80.pdf Please, follow the standard forms. I wrote a wrong date of Old Hungarian script adoptation date. The date is 2015. see document: https://unicode.org/standard/supported.html

ghost commented 3 years ago

@google-admin @marekjez86 @dscorbett The final document about Old Hungarian script, which was adopted as UNICODE standard in version 8.0, in 2015: https://unicode.org/L2/L2012/12334-n4374-oldhungarian-adhoc.pdf The part of the UNICODE standard 8.0, Europe-II section: http://www.unicode.org/versions/Unicode8.0.0/ch08.pdf In this document is written about Old Hungarian script (page 351) In this document aren't written about above acute or above dot(s). In this document are written about punctuation signs(page 351): "Punctuation and Numbers. Traditional texts separate words with spaces or with one, two, or four dots. Modern users punctuate Old Hungarian with U+0020 space, U+2E41 reversed comma, and U+2E42 double low-reversed-9 quotation mark, with some use of U+2E31 word separator middle dot, U+205A two dot punctuation, U+205D tricolon, and U+205E vertical four dots as well. " About directionality(page 351): "Directionality. The primary direction of writing is right-to-left both in historical sources and in modern use. Conformant implementations of Old Hungarian script must use the Unicode Bidirectional Algorithm (see Unicode Standard Annex #9, “Unicode Bidirectional Algorithm”). The forms of Old Hungarian letters and numbers downloadable from (I repeat myself, because of that everything will be toghether in one comment.) https://unicode.org/charts/PDF/U10C80.pdf Thanks.

ghost commented 3 years ago

@marekjez86 @dscorbett The full Unicode 8.0 charts pdf downloadable from http://unicode.org/Public/8.0.0/chats page That's already enought?

ghost commented 3 years ago

@dscorbett David, vagy Dávid? Esetleg másvalaki(k)? Roppant érdekesnek tartom, hogy akkor dourcultál be, amikor András neve előkerült, és hivatalos linkekre és dokumentumokra kezdtem el hivatkozni. Elég átlátszó taktikát választottál. Csak van egy kis bibi. Ékezetes betűket nem tartalmaz a szabvány, aminek hivatalos dokumentuma http://unicode.org/charts/PDF/U10C80.pdf Egy betűkészleten belül lehet ligatúrákat és eltérő irányú karaktereket definiálni, de egyazon kódon belül felülírni karaktereket csak úgy nem lehet. Főleg hogy nem szabványos a módosítás. Már korábban gyanakodtam, hogy baj van a neved körül. Előszedsz egy full magyar szöveget, angol anyanyelvű létedre? És ha a következő mondatomat is érted, akkor gond van bogaram: pejparipa pimpili a popódba!

ghost commented 3 years ago

@dscorbett Azzal, hogy ezt a hibajelet fenntartod, csak azt éred el, hogy nem lesz lezárva a projekt, és nem lesz hivatalos rovás karakterkészlet androidra. Ez a célotok?

ghost commented 3 years ago

@dscorbett : Noto fonts try to include scripts and features as defined by Unicode (many less :-)). It's not clear to me that any character outside of "U+1DC4 COMBINING MACRON-ACUTE duplicating mark" is part of the standard.

This means that semantics of U+0301 COMBINING ACUTE ACCENT, U+0304 COMBINING MACRON , U+0307 COMBINING DOT ABOVE in Old Hungarian will not be implemented in Noto until Unicode addresses these.

However, because we need to look at U+1DC4 COMBINING MACRON-ACUTE duplicating mark I'll re-open the issue. Thank you for pointing this up.

Marek, Is this a joke? Why was it reopened? The standard form of the Old Hungarian script downloadable from http://unicode.org/charts/PDF/U10C80.pdf The standard Old Hungarian script was introduced into the Unicode 8.0.0, in 2015, the according document downloadable from page http://www.unicode.org/versions/Unicode8.0.0/ch08.pdf The charts which was introduced into the Unicode 8.0.0 downloadable from page https://unicode.org/Public/8.0.0/charts/CodeCharts.pdf Old Hungarian part of the standard has not changed yet. Where is it described, that the acute accent and the others are requirements? The document, which was the base of the standard, downloadable from page https://unicode.org/L2/L2012/12334-n4374-oldhungarian-adhoc.pdf I can't read everywhere about acute accent. The documents, which ones David refers, never was adopted, just archived. May I ask you, close it again?

ghost commented 3 years ago

@dscorbett @marekjez86 David, Marek, However I disagree the style of user @Kixidevel , there are facts, that he wrote and in uploaded documents by him. Doc. https://www.unicode.org/L2/L2011/11087-szekely.pdf referred by David, really was ignored Doc, https://www.unicode.org/L2/L2011/11242-n4110-oldhungarian-adhoc.pdf and doc. https://www.unicode.org/L2/L2011/11242r-n4110r-oldhungarian-adhoc.pdf referred by David, really were ignored. Doc, https://www.unicode.org/L2/L2009/09059-n3566.pdf and doc. https://www.unicode.org/L2/L2009/09059r-n3566r.pdf really were ignored. (these are encode Old Hungarian letter "a" to Unicode point 0860, which code point is one of the Syriac letters) etc... Old Hungarian symbols by Unicode standard describe strictly its forms: http://unicode.org/charts/PDF/U10C80.pdf The Old Hungarian letters used and useful for writing Hungarian texts has all Hungarian sounds. When Latin based write system become used widely, the basic Latin letters weren't enough. Then Hungarians started use letters and letter combinations like "cs" "gy" "ly" "ny" "sz" "ty" "zs" "á" "é" "í" "ó" "ö" "ő" "ú" "ü" and "ű". In the first bible translation to Hungarian language (Károly-Biblia or Károli-Biblia) still used "Wr" word form instead of modern Hungarian word form "Úr". (It means "God" or "Lord" ) and still used "Wy" word form instead of modern Hungarian form "Új" (It means "new"). See the figures on wikipage https://hu.wikipedia.org/wiki/K%C3%A1rolyi-biblia Finally, I think, there is a must to follow the strict Unicode standard forms, as defined in docs. http://unicode.org/charts/PDF/U10C80.pdf and http://www.unicode.org/versions/Unicode8.0.0/ch08.pdf

dscorbett commented 3 years ago

Old Hungarian symbols by Unicode standard describe strictly its forms: http://unicode.org/charts/PDF/U10C80.pdf

That chart does not support your claims. Code charts include sample glyphs for single code points in a certain block. They are not intended to be the complete documentation of every glyph used for a script. Compare the Tifinagh code chart: it does not mention ligatures or diacritics, but Tifinagh does use ligatures and diacritics.

ghost commented 3 years ago

The doc. https://www.unicode.org/versions/Unicode8.0.0/UnicodeStandard-8.0.pdf

Old Hungarian symbols by Unicode standard describe strictly its forms: http://unicode.org/charts/PDF/U10C80.pdf

That chart does not support your claims. Code charts include sample glyphs for single code points in a certain block. They are not intended to be the complete documentation of every glyph used for a script. Compare the Tifinagh code chart: it does not mention ligatures or diacritics, but Tifinagh does use ligatures and diacritics.

The doc https://www.unicode.org/versions/Unicode8.0.0/UnicodeStandard-8.0.pdf write about punctuation and direction, but doesn't write about diacritics, because Old Hungarian standard defines all letters which required for writing Old Hungarian texts. I wrote before, Old Hungarian texts didn't use diacritics. Earlier latin based texts did use les or none diacritics. There is a picture, that shows, what you want to suggest, and what suggest the standard: rovas_e_ee I don't think, is it a req. to add an another Old Hungarian letter "é", or as in the chart http://unicode.org/charts/PDF/U10C80.pdf explain, letter "ee". @Kixidevel tried it to explain for you in table Paired Old Hungarian vowels with Latin based Hungarian vowels Don't compare Tifinagh symbols with Old Hungarian symbols! Their writing systems are different.

ghost commented 3 years ago

@dscorbett David, there is the first famous document, written in Latin based Hungarian text from the 12th-13th century. Hungarian text in Pray codex As you can look, this text still didn't use any accent acute or any other kind of signs, why do you think, in the Old Hungarian script had used? And please see again this comparison chart: Paired Old Hungarian vowels with Latin based Hungarian vowels

ghost commented 3 years ago

Section 11 of L2/09-059R claims that Petrovay János used a horizontal overline to denote long vowels, which figure 3 of “Egy személyes történet a nemzedékeken át megőrzött ősi örökségről” corroborates. Scripts in Unicode nearly always use either their own script-specific diacritics or the common-script diacritics, not a mix of both. Therefore, if the duplicating mark is the common-script U+1DC4, this diacritic is the common-script U+0304 COMBINING MACRON.

Petrovay János really used in document figure 3 of “Egy személyes történet a nemzedékeken át megőrzött ősi örökségről” But it seems, Petrovay didn't know Old Hungarian letters well. I underline several non-used letters with red line. (I don't underline all of them) Several unknown letterforms Please, don't forget, this document was written, when Latin based Hungarian spelling already was clearly defined. Modern(!) Latin based Hungarian spelling on that time already uses above acute, double above acute and above dots. Petrovay try to follow this rules. Don't answer yet, because I want to write something.

ghost commented 3 years ago

ghost commented 3 years ago

@dscorbett I will give another infos, too. Now, at the moment I busy.

ghost commented 3 years ago

@dscorbett There are several picture from a book and newspaper written in Old Hungarian script:

Írástudó newpaper, from 2004:

Írástudó newspaper, from 2004

A book published in the care of Michael Everson,2016 (Alice in Wonderland):

Alice in Wonderland, book published in the care of Michael Everson, 2016

(Michael Everson was the leader of Old Hungarian script's standardization.)

A photo from a page of book "Alice in Wonderland":

A photo of a page from Alice in Wonderland

A book published by Tamás Rumi, 2010: "Gyula Illyés: Hét meg hét magyar népmese".

hetmeghet It still uses Unicode form of Old Hungarian letter "ë" (close e) as letter "h"

ghost commented 3 years ago

@dscorbett @marekjez86 David, Marek, I hardly need to close this newer-ending discussion. A famous researcher of Old Hungarian script, Géza Ferenci archaeologist historian, museum director defined the year for which we can speak of historical Old Hungarian writing finds. The year is 1802. After that year studies may have appeared, but those aren't historical artifacts. I asked Klára Friedrich, whether before 1802 already were used acutes on Old Hungarian letters. He wrote me a short, angry e-mail: "Több mint 25 éve foglalkozom rovásírással, de nem találkoztam ékezetes betűvel 1802 előtt." It means: "I have been doing Old Hungarian writing research for more than 25 years, but I did not encounter an accented letter before 1802." She continue with the following: "Ha mégis egy-két rovásemlék előkerülne majd, az nem az általános használatot jelenti, hanem egyedi megoldás. " It means: "If one or two Old Hungarian script monuments would appear on the future, it do not mean general use, but a unique solution." At the end of her e-mail wrote: "Volt, amikor a hosszú magánhangzót kettőzött magánhangzóval jelölték, de ez is ritkán." It means: "There were times when the long vowel was denoted by a double vowel, but this is also rare"

Finally: as you can read my previous comments about standard, about the history of the Latin based Hungarian spelling, and the standard build on the facts, as you know now, what tell and wrote Hungarian professional historians, this issue must be closed.

I link again table of @Kixidevel about vowels: Paired Capital Old Hungarian vowels with modern Latin based capital Hungarian vowels

Please, do not want to override the Unicode standard!

ghost commented 3 years ago

@dscorbett @marekjez86 David, Marek, I forgot link a page: Additional informations about books, news and another things related Old Hungarian script

ghost commented 3 years ago

@dscorbett @marekjez86 David, Marek, I don't know, who wrote you that Old Hungarian letters need diacritics. I can read and write Old Hungarian texts, I never met in books diacritics. I know about one or two "educational" booklets, which didn't follow the standard. I think, authors of these booklets inform you. The standard form of this letters were already used at least fifteen years ago educational on competitions as well. Klára Friedrich asked your informant, when wrote by knife on rectangular wooden stick, how could wrote diacritics. Initially the Old Hungarian texts wrote to wooden sticks by knife.

ghost commented 3 years ago

@dscorbett @marekjez86 There are more cities in Hungary and in neighboring states - where Hungarians live - which have place name table written in Old Hungarian script, too. I selected two of these city-tables, on wich are long vowels too.

Hódmezővásárhely:

Csongrád:

As you can see, the long vowels signed by modified letterforms, not with diacritics.

ghost commented 3 years ago

@google-admin I think, I give enough informations, why this issue need to be closed.

tamasbartos commented 3 years ago

@dscorbett @marekjez86 David, Marek, there are a tricky fake document, referred by David: Tricky fake referred by David It uses triangle as Old Hungarian "o", which never was used in this form. In the 6th line uses letters with an another letter's form, for example Old Hungarian letter "B" must be "X" form, but in the text it uses as letter "V", and the 3 words in the 6th line, begining with that Old Hungarian "B" is readable as the following: "Bagy az mír", that hasn't meanings, the author maybe tried to write "Vagy az míg", that has meanings. See chart http://unicode.org/charts/PDF/U10C80.pdf

dscorbett commented 3 years ago

According to this diplomatic transcription and this normalized one, the phrase in question is “𐳏𐳛𐳎 𐳀‍𐳯 𐳘𐳂𐳢” (“hogy az ember”) though to me it looks like “𐳏𐳀𐳎 𐳀‍𐳯 𐳘𐳂𐳢” (“hagy az ember”). Petrovay evidently used some unusual character shapes, including a “Y”-shaped ⟨𐳂⟩ (b) instead of the standard “X”-shaped one.

tamasbartos commented 3 years ago

According to this diplomatic transcription and this normalized one, the phrase in question is “𐳏𐳛𐳎 𐳀‍𐳯 𐳘𐳂𐳢” (“hogy az ember”) though to me it looks like “𐳏𐳀𐳎 𐳀‍𐳯 𐳘𐳂𐳢” (“hagy az ember”). Petrovay evidently used some unusual character shapes, including a “Y”-shaped ⟨𐳂⟩ (b) instead of the standard “X”-shaped one.

Congratulations! What's the next step? You replace standard form of "o" with triangle? There are facts from the Hungarian history: The Hungarian War of Independence failed in 1849. The different nations in Hungarian Kingdom (Croatians, Slovaks, Transylvanian-Romanians) and the Army of Russian Tsar helped the Austrian Emperor's Army. The Hungarian Academy of Sciences had been founded. (Magyar Tudományos Akadémia - MTA ) The MTA started to begin researches about Old Hungarian script, too. There was the renaissance of Old Hungarian writing. At that times false finds were also made. At that time we can no longer speak about newer borned Old Hungarian scripts as historic scripts. The original Old Hungarian scripts had been carved in wooden sticks. Because of that texts had been carved in wooden sticks, the acutes weren't used. The main problem is that, Old Hungarian script is again used, (that was the reason of the standardization) and there are several "scientists" who want to use acutes and other letterforms. For example Dr. Gábor Hosszú tried to smuggle Kazar letters as Old Hungarian letters with hiddenly submitted draft standard to Unicode organization in 2012, without discussion with other persons and groups whoose uses and researches Old Hungarian scripts. http://magyarrovas.hu/hosszu-gabor-kiserlete There are persons, who are thinking about Old Hungarian scripts as big businnes, like Tamás Rumi, Gábor Hosszú. http://magyarrovas.hu/szakacs-gabor-irasa (in 2012)

tamasbartos commented 3 years ago

@dscorbett Sorry, I hit a key 9 instead of 8 in date of failed Hungarian War of Independence. Correct is 1849.

tamasbartos commented 3 years ago

@marekjez86 I think there are enought facts and infos which justify closing this issue.. The other issues, which ones @dscorbett opened, are corrects.

tamasbartos commented 3 years ago

@dscorbett @marekjez86 The Apple already developed Old Hungarian font for IPhone, without acutes, because of that nobody try to misleading them about this false requirement.

tamasbartos commented 3 years ago

Because they are attested.

Who are "they"?

dscorbett commented 3 years ago

“They” means the diacritics in question.

tamasbartos commented 3 years ago

“They” means the diacritics in question.

Sorry, Hungarian grammar is very different from English grammar. My question is that, who wants to use diacritics in Old Hungarian texts? We try to explain for you, that diacritics used only the time of "renaissance" of Old Hungarian scripts. (19th-20th century) Nowadays we try to go back to the original system of the Old Hungarian letter forms. We try to teach childrens the Old Hungarian letters in that forms as written by our ancestors. I think, that isn't a good idea to use vowels with all forms of used in 19th-20th century. For example triangle with above accent as Old Hungarian "ó".

tamasbartos commented 3 years ago

@dscorbett There is a find from 15th century. Above the letters are explanations of the Old Hungarian (Secler-Hungarian) letters. Nikolsburger alphabet As you know now, the Old Hungarian script little bit older than 100-200 years.

tamasbartos commented 3 years ago

@GoogleCodeExporter I ask Google's management to ignore this Issue because:

1: In NotoSansFontOldHungarian-Regular font already implemented long vowels according the Unicode standard: http://unicode.org/charts/PDF/U10C80.pdf

2: The documents, which uses accute, are no longer considered historic finds, those were written 19th and 20th century. On that times more fake were born to justify the researcher. That fake is, for example: Fake document It has not only accute, it overrides letters' forms: triangle as Old Hungarian "o", Old Hungarian letter "b" as shaped "Y", etc..

3: Originally the Old Hungarian texts cut onto wooden sticks, on wooden sticks wasn't space for accute.

4:The goal of standardization was an uniform used alphabet.

5:Apple already developed their Old Hungarian font for IPhones according to strict standard.

tamasbartos commented 3 years ago

@GoogleCodeExporter I'm Sorry, unfortunately I broke the previous comment. The corrected comment is on the issue #1374 previous comment.

tamasbartos commented 3 years ago

https://github.com/googlefonts/noto-fonts/issues/1374#issuecomment-753840675

tamasbartos commented 3 years ago

@GoogleCodeExporter https://github.com/googlefonts/noto-fonts/issues/1374#issuecomment-753840675

tamasbartos commented 3 years ago

@dscorbett David Corbett, please read the followig text carefully. I believe that, as Software engineer in US, it's hard to write that you are sorry, misled, but in this case you should.

When you opened this issue, your preferred documents from http://nyelvmuveles.hu , which is a frivolous webpage - they try to override Hungarian spelling system, too. They wrote, for example there is a must to use letter ë in Latin based Hungarian spelling system, but the closed e (ë) used only in one or two dialects, the other dialects use vowel "e" instead of "ë" and the literary Hungarian language doesn't use "ë" vowel, too.

The document refered by you from the unicode archived documents, never was using, it was ignored.

The congress in Budapest, in the university BME, congress in Gödöllő city and the congress in Solt city it was clearly stated that accents and duplication marks were never used in historical Old Hungarian script.

The 1802 year, defined by researchers while we can speak of a historical Old Hungarian script find. Until 1802, there are no accented finds.

Use accents in Old Hungarian script according the Unicode standard is unnecessary, because the standard defines long vowel forms without accents, too.

No duplication marks was used until 1802, too.

The main reason, that the historical Old Hungarian texts didn't use accents and duplication marks is that, originally the texts were cut into wooden stics, and on wooden sticks wasn't space accents and duplication marks.

I know, that I repeated ourselves, but the facts are facts.

Using accents in Old Hungarian scripts is Latinization, and using triangle as "o" is Latinization, too.

From the 18th century they started using accents and above dots in Latin based Hungarian spelling, because of that, Hungarian language use more vowels than Latin script has. The Old Hungarian script has symple symbols for additional vowels.

That was the age of Hungarian language renewal. The Old Hungarian script is older.

From 18th century started to use lettercombinations in Latin based Hungarian scripts like "cs" ,"sz", "zs", "ny" etc.. which are single sounds, and these consonants aren't in the original Latin script. These consonants all have one symbol in Old Hungarian script.

tamasbartos commented 3 years ago

@marekjez86 Marek, please read the previous comment in issue #1374 , and close issue #1374

dscorbett commented 3 years ago

I have read your comment carefully. My responses are below.

http://nyelvmuveles.hu [...] try to override Hungarian spelling system, too. They wrote, for example there is a must to use letter ë in Latin based Hungarian spelling system, but the closed e (ë) used only in one or two dialects, the other dialects use vowel "e" instead of "ë" and the literary Hungarian language doesn't use "ë" vowel, too.

Proposals to reform the Latin-script orthography are not relevant to this Noto issue.

The document refered by you from the unicode archived documents, never was using, it was ignored.

That is not relevant to this Noto issue. I referred to the document as an example of attestation, not as proof that Unicode took any particular action.

The 1802 year, defined by researchers while we can speak of a historical Old Hungarian script find. Until 1802, there are no accented finds. [...] No duplication marks was used until 1802, too.

Were they ever used after 1802?

Use accents in Old Hungarian script according the Unicode standard is unnecessary, because the standard defines long vowel forms without accents, too.

Many orthographies have features one might consider unnecessary. The point of Unicode is not to encode only the perfect, most efficient orthography for any given language. The point is to represent writing as it actually is used, or has once been used.

Here is an analogy. Unicode includes the character U+A79B LATIN SMALL LETTER VOLAPUK AE. That letter was a proposal from the early development of Volapük, was hardly ever used, and is never used today. Instead, the favored letter is U+00E4 LATIN SMALL LETTER A WITH DIAERESIS. Similarly, <U+10CC0 OLD HUNGARIAN SMALL LETTER A, U+0301 COMBINING ACUTE ACCENT> is a proposal from the early modern revival of Old Hungarian, was hardly ever used, and is deprecated in favor of U+10C81 OLD HUNGARIAN CAPITAL LETTER AA.

Using accents in Old Hungarian scripts is Latinization

I agree, but if some 19th-century Hungarians wanted to Latinize the Old Hungarian script, that’s their prerogative. What’s wrong with Latinization anyway? Treating the kv, vv, and ksz ligatures differently from all other ligatures is also Latinization, but you seemed fine with that.

and using triangle as "o" is Latinization, too.

I don’t know why you mention that. I’m not proposing changing the shape of the o.

tamasbartos commented 3 years ago

I have read your comment carefully. My responses are below.

http://nyelvmuveles.hu [...] try to override Hungarian spelling system, too. They wrote, for example there is a must to use letter ë in Latin based Hungarian spelling system, but the closed e (ë) used only in one or two dialects, the other dialects use vowel "e" instead of "ë" and the literary Hungarian language doesn't use "ë" vowel, too.

Proposals to reform the Latin-script orthography are not relevant to this Noto issue.

I just try to explain, why your source is frivolous. You used the document as source: http://nyelvmuveles.hu/osi-magyar-iras-rovas/27

The document refered by you from the unicode archived documents, never was using, it was ignored.

That is not relevant to this Noto issue. I referred to the document as an example of attestation, not as proof that Unicode took any particular action.

It seems, you acknowledged, that document, you refered, wasn't a correct source.

The 1802 year, defined by researchers while we can speak of a historical Old Hungarian script find. Until 1802, there are no accented finds. [...] No duplication marks was used until 1802, too.

Were they ever used after 1802?

Use accents in Old Hungarian script according the Unicode standard is unnecessary, because the standard defines long vowel forms without accents, too.

Many orthographies have features one might consider unnecessary. The point of Unicode is not to encode only the perfect, most efficient orthography for any given language. The point is to represent writing as it actually is used, or has once been used.

Here is an analogy. Unicode includes the character U+A79B LATIN SMALL LETTER VOLAPUK AE. That letter was a proposal from the early development of Volapük, was hardly ever used, and is never used today. Instead, the favored letter is U+00E4 LATIN SMALL LETTER A WITH DIAERESIS. Similarly, <U+10CC0 OLD HUNGARIAN SMALL LETTER A, U+0301 COMBINING ACUTE ACCENT> is a proposal from the early modern revival of Old Hungarian, was hardly ever used, and is deprecated in favor of U+10C81 OLD HUNGARIAN CAPITAL LETTER AA.

Using accents in Old Hungarian scripts is Latinization

I agree, but if some 19th-century Hungarians wanted to Latinize the Old Hungarian script, that’s their prerogative.

They didn't want to Latinize the Old Hungarian script, they symple didn't have enough information about Old Hungarian script. The Old Hungarian sctipt was widelly used by Seclers, which is an etnic group in transylvania. Transylvania in the 19th century was a part of Hungarian Kingdom. The territory of the Hungarian Kingdom was the entire Carpatian Basin, no wonder many did not know Old Hungarian writing. In the congresses, when was decided the Unicode standard, expers also came from Transylvania.

What’s wrong with Latinization anyway? Treating the kv, vv, and ksz ligatures differently from all other ligatures is also Latinization, but you seemed fine with that.

I don't agree with using these ligatures, too, but unfortunately nowadays users started to use widelly these ligatures. Additionally in this font was developed ligature "x" in that kind of form, which one use a small group. It seems, only your informants try to systematize the use of accents. One of the goal of the standardization was that, to uniform set of symbols of Old Hungarian script, followed the widelly used forms of letters. The reason, that the users, who decided what will be used in Unicode, didn't protest yet, they don't speak in English. They could not learn English in the communist system. You know the history of the eastern block?

and using triangle as "o" is Latinization, too.

I don’t know why you mention that. I’m not proposing changing the shape of the o.

I talked about that, you used it as source: You used this picture On this picture the "o" has form as triangle.

This issue based on cynicism. The Unicode standard doedn't encode, on which codepoint must to be used for the Latin letter "á"? It replecable with latin letter "å"?

tamasbartos commented 3 years ago

@dscorbett I believe, that Klára Sándor, Tamás Rumi, László Sipos or Dr Gábor Hosszú enjoy this debate, but we don't really.

tamasbartos commented 3 years ago

@dscorbett Latin lettet "a" has unicode codepoint, Latin letter "á" has unicode codepoint, Letter "å" has unicode codepoint. To which codepoint would the Old Hungarian letter "a" with accute be assigned, in your opinion?

dscorbett commented 3 years ago

It would be assigned the sequence <U+10CC0 OLD HUNGARIAN SMALL LETTER A, U+0301 COMBINING ACUTE ACCENT>.

tamasbartos commented 3 years ago

It would be assigned the sequence <U+10CC0 OLD HUNGARIAN SMALL LETTER A, U+0301 COMBINING ACUTE ACCENT>.

And why would it better, than using U+10CC1?

dscorbett commented 3 years ago

In what sense do you mean “better”? U+10CC1 is better for most purposes. <U+10CC0, U+0301> is better if you want an acute accent, which is only useful when discussing the early modern history of Old Hungarian.

tamasbartos commented 3 years ago

In what sense do you mean “better”? U+10CC1 is better for most purposes. <U+10CC0, U+0301> is better if you want an acute accent, which is only useful when discussing the early modern history of Old Hungarian.

If somebody want to use a font for discussing the early modern history of Old Hungarian script use his or her own font, not an official font. The Unicode standard Old Hungarian script wasn't developed for discussions. This developed for writing novels, poems, tales for childrens and adults and communicating with it. In the other words: teaching love for traditions. If the Noto-fonts project would adopted accented form of letters, the scientist would be move from practitioners of science to writers. And what would be the result: chaos in the books, electronic bookbindig. What do you think, why we listed a small part of the books written according to unicode standard? Thete are much more books written in Old Hungarian Unicode standard script. Do you think, that discussions about modern history of Old Hungarian script so large theme, that requires mobile for that? Several books are enough for it. And what about triangle shaped "o"? Doesn't require for "discussions about modern history of Old Hungarian script", however it appear in a find of "early modern history Old Hungarian script"?

You are so naive, and you don't know how Hungarians are thinking. I am quarter-blooded Slavic and I see better, what happening really, than you from the US. Do you know at all where is Hungary?

tamasbartos commented 3 years ago

@marekjez86 Those , (for example Klára Sándor, in Hungarian form: Sándor Klára) who want to use accuted Noto-font "for scientific discussion" have prevented Old Hungarian script from being taught in schools. Their obvious purpose was to use a secondary standard script to force on it people. If they really want to use this capability for "discussing early modern history of Old Hungarian script", why don't ask an issue to use triangle form of "o", "Y" shaped "b" which are also appeared in a 20th century find? The amount of finds are little to justify the inclusion of the accent in the Old Hungarian font. So far they have been able to solve the display of accented artifacts in their publications with symple photocopies. They simply want to squeze the standard expense out of the public consciousness. The result would be symple electronic bookbinding. If you want, I would give links from the http://mek.oszk.hu from all e-books written by the Unicode Old Hungarian script. The list would be so large, than would fit in one comment. If You want to bookbinding keep open this issue, if not, close it.

tamasbartos commented 3 years ago

@marekjez86 I missed one word in comment https://github.com/googlefonts/noto-fonts/issues/1374#issuecomment-759283506 The list of e-books in http://mek.oszk.hu so large, that would not fit in one comment.

tamasbartos commented 3 years ago

@marekjez86 Marek, you didn't react comment https://github.com/googlefonts/noto-fonts/issues/1374#issuecomment-759283506 and extended comment https://github.com/googlefonts/noto-fonts/issues/1374#issuecomment-759373346 . So I must to list all e-books from http://mek.oszk.hu ! This homepage is the official webpage of 'Országos Széchenyi Könyvtár' (Hungarian National Library "Széchenyi")

notofonts / noto-fonts