Re: Status of IPA patch?

Re: Status of IPA patch?

[Aidan Kehoe]

My attempt to send this to emacs-pretest-bug earlier this month silently
failed; maybe I’ll have more luck with emacs-devel, though in theory they’re
the same list. 

 Ar an deichiú lá de mí Lúnasa, scríobh Aidan Kehoe: 

 > Hi Oleksandr -- 
 > 
 > The omission of those two was intentional, since U+20A7 is equivalent to tʃ
 > (note that that digraph doesn’t include the tie that would be necessary to
 > have it as a phoneme distinct from /t/ followed by /ʃ/) and g is equivalent
 > to U+0261 for the purposes of the IPA.
 > 
 > I don’t know what’s happening with the application of the patch to GNU
 > Emacs. I use and develop for XEmacs, it hasn’t been a problem for me; maybe
 > the list can tell us if there are any problems with it. 
 > 
 > Ciao, 
 > 
 > 	Aidan
 > 
 >  Ar an deichiú lá de mí Lúnasa, scríobh Oleksandr Gavenko: 
 > 
 >  > You make patch for IPA input method:
 >  > 
 >  > http://thread.gmane.org/gmane.emacs.bugs/23612
 >  > 
 >  > I online browse source:
 >  > 
 >  > http://cvs.savannah.gnu.org/viewvc/emacs/leim/quail/ipa.el?root=emacs&view=log
 >  > 
 >  > and see that it not yet applyed. But it provide useful features.
 >  > It nicely  if you try again ask developer to apply this patch.
 >  > 
 >  > Also I mail you because have such question:
 >  > 
 >  > There are two chars in English phonetic transcription:
 >  >   ʧ (\u02A7 LATIN SMALL LETTER TESH DIGRAPH)
 >  >   and ɡ (\u0261 LATIN SMALL LETTER SCRIPT G)
 >  > which used in English/Russian dictionaries and
 >  > they both do not present in your ipa.el file.
 >  > 
 >  > TESH DIGRAPH can be typed as t and LATIN SMALL LETTER ESH.
 >  > SMALL LETTER SCRIPT G can be typed as g (\u0067) - but some fonts
 >  > display differ (see article http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/G ).
 >  > 
 >  > Can you comment question and if it have reason add support
 >  > for this chars?
 > 
 > -- 
 > ¿Dónde estará ahora mi sobrino Yoghurtu Nghe, que tuvo que huir
 > precipitadamente de la aldea por culpa de la escasez de rinocerontes?

-- 
¿Dónde estará ahora mi sobrino Yoghurtu Nghe, que tuvo que huir
precipitadamente de la aldea por culpa de la escasez de rinocerontes?

Re: Status of IPA patch?

[Glenn Morris]

Aidan Kehoe wrote:

> My attempt to send this to emacs-pretest-bug earlier this month silently
> failed; maybe I’ll have more luck with emacs-devel, though in theory they’re
> the same list. 

It arrived fine. The lists are not the same.

Here is your original message:

http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnu-emacs/2009-08/msg00299.html

also here

http://emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=4109

Re: Status of IPA patch?

[Aidan Kehoe]

 Ar an cúigiú lá is fiche de mí Lúnasa, scríobh Glenn Morris: 

 > Aidan Kehoe wrote:
 > 
 > > My attempt to send this to emacs-pretest-bug earlier this month silently
 > > failed; maybe I’ll have more luck with emacs-devel, though in theory they’re
 > > the same list. 
 > 
 > It arrived fine. The lists are not the same.

http://www.emacswiki.org/emacs/EmacsMailingLists#emacs-pretest-bug needs
correction, then. 

 > Here is your original message:
 > 
 > http://lists.gnu.org/archive/html/bug-gnu-emacs/2009-08/msg00299.html
 > 
 > also here
 > 
 > http://emacsbugs.donarmstrong.com/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=4109

-- 
¿Dónde estará ahora mi sobrino Yoghurtu Nghe, que tuvo que huir
precipitadamente de la aldea por culpa de la escasez de rinocerontes?

Re: Status of IPA patch?

[Juri Linkov]

>  > The omission of those two was intentional, since U+20A7 is equivalent to tʃ
>  > (note that that digraph doesn’t include the tie that would be necessary to
>  > have it as a phoneme distinct from /t/ followed by /ʃ/) and g is equivalent
>  > to U+0261 for the purposes of the IPA.

I don’t understand why do you omit U+20A7 and U+0261 if they exist in
X-SAMPA and Kirshenbaum?

-- 
Juri Linkov
http://www.jurta.org/emacs/

Re: Status of IPA patch?

[Aidan Kehoe]

 Ar an t-ochtú lá is fiche de mí Lúnasa, scríobh Juri Linkov: 

 > >  > The omission of those two was intentional, since U+20A7 is
 > >  > equivalent to tʃ (note that that digraph doesn’t include the tie
 > >  > that would be necessary to have it as a phoneme distinct from /t/
 > >  > followed by /ʃ/) and g is equivalent to U+0261 for the purposes of
 > >  > the IPA.
 > 
 > I don’t understand why do you omit U+20A7 and U+0261 if they exist in
 > X-SAMPA and Kirshenbaum?

The IPA standards (which X-SAMPA and Kirshenbaum build on) define _U+20A7_
and _U+0261_ as being equivalent to _a succession of U+0074 and U+0283_, and
_U+0067_, respectively. The former two code points just represent
compatibility glyphs (with U+20A7 leading to needless confusion, since
people might reasonably believe that it meant the same as U+0074 U+2040
U+0283, including the tie I mention above).

Kirshenbaum mentions ASCII g as mapping to both U+0067 and U+0261 without
comment. Including both would not add to the semantic range of what the user
can input (in terms of the IPA), and would again be needlessly confusing
(the user types g; wonders if 0 or 1 is more appropriate; when it doesn’t
actually matter, and U+0067 is always more certain to be preserved by
software). Kirshenbaum ignores U+20A7.

X-SAMPA ignores both U+20A7 and the U+0067 vs. U+0261 question. 

-- 
¿Dónde estará ahora mi sobrino Yoghurtu Nghe, que tuvo que huir
precipitadamente de la aldea por culpa de la escasez de rinocerontes?

Re: Status of IPA patch?

[Aidan Kehoe]

 Ar an t-ochtú lá is fiche de mí Lúnasa, scríobh Aidan Kehoe: 

 > [...]

(Other people might have made different decisions, but I do think mine are
reasonable.)

-- 
¿Dónde estará ahora mi sobrino Yoghurtu Nghe, que tuvo que huir
precipitadamente de la aldea por culpa de la escasez de rinocerontes?

Re: Status of IPA patch?

[Miles Bader]

Aidan Kehoe <kehoea@parhasard.net> writes:
> (Other people might have made different decisions, but I do think mine are
> reasonable.)

(Is there any other major software to be compatible with?)

-miles

-- 
Bride, n. A woman with a fine prospect of happiness behind her.

Re: Status of IPA patch?

[Aidan Kehoe]

 Ar an t-ochtú lá is fiche de mí Lúnasa, scríobh Miles Bader: 

 > Aidan Kehoe <kehoea@parhasard.net> writes:
 > > (Other people might have made different decisions, but I do think mine are
 > > reasonable.)
 > 
 > (Is there any other major software to be compatible with?)

Well, SCIM, but that’s not really major. My friend Clint, here:
http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=499558 preferred the script
G when he adapted the Kirshenbaum method to SCIM, and didn’t offere a
choice; if anyone has an SCIM install, I’d be curious as to what that does
with its X-SAMPA input. 

-- 
¿Dónde estará ahora mi sobrino Yoghurtu Nghe, que tuvo que huir
precipitadamente de la aldea por culpa de la escasez de rinocerontes?

Re: Status of IPA patch?

[Juri Linkov]

>  > (Is there any other major software to be compatible with?)
>
> Well, SCIM, but that’s not really major. My friend Clint, here:
> http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=499558 preferred the script
> G when he adapted the Kirshenbaum method to SCIM, and didn’t offere a
> choice; if anyone has an SCIM install, I’d be curious as to what that does
> with its X-SAMPA input.

Both X-SAMPA and Kirshenbaum SCIM inputs use U+0261 for `g'.

IPA-X-SAMPA:
g	ɡ	0	# U+0261 LATIN SMALL LETTER SCRIPT G

IPA-Kirshenbaum:
g	ɡ	0	# U+0261 LATIN SMALL LETTER SCRIPT G

I see no reason to deviate from this standard in Emacs.

-- 
Juri Linkov
http://www.jurta.org/emacs/

Re: Status of IPA patch?

[Aidan Kehoe]

 Ar an t-ochtú lá is fiche de mí Lúnasa, scríobh Juri Linkov: 

 > >  > (Is there any other major software to be compatible with?)
 > >
 > > Well, SCIM, but that’s not really major. My friend Clint, here:
 > > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=499558 preferred the
 > > script G when he adapted the Kirshenbaum method to SCIM, and didn’t
 > > offere a choice; if anyone has an SCIM install, I’d be curious as to
 > > what that does with its X-SAMPA input.
 > 
 > Both X-SAMPA and Kirshenbaum SCIM inputs use U+0261 for `g'.
 > 
 > IPA-X-SAMPA:
 > g	ɡ	0	# U+0261 LATIN SMALL LETTER SCRIPT G
 > 
 > IPA-Kirshenbaum:
 > g	ɡ	0	# U+0261 LATIN SMALL LETTER SCRIPT G
 > 
 > I see no reason to deviate from this standard in Emacs.

SCIM is a standard? Interesting perspective. 

-- 
¿Dónde estará ahora mi sobrino Yoghurtu Nghe, que tuvo que huir
precipitadamente de la aldea por culpa de la escasez de rinocerontes?

Re: Status of IPA patch?

[Juri Linkov]

>  > >  > (Is there any other major software to be compatible with?)
>  > >
>  > > Well, SCIM, but that’s not really major. My friend Clint, here:
>  > > http://bugs.debian.org/cgi-bin/bugreport.cgi?bug=499558 preferred the
>  > > script G when he adapted the Kirshenbaum method to SCIM, and didn’t
>  > > offere a choice; if anyone has an SCIM install, I’d be curious as to
>  > > what that does with its X-SAMPA input.
>  >
>  > Both X-SAMPA and Kirshenbaum SCIM inputs use U+0261 for `g'.
>  >
>  > IPA-X-SAMPA:
>  > g	ɡ	0	# U+0261 LATIN SMALL LETTER SCRIPT G
>  >
>  > IPA-Kirshenbaum:
>  > g	ɡ	0	# U+0261 LATIN SMALL LETTER SCRIPT G
>  >
>  > I see no reason to deviate from this standard in Emacs.
>
> SCIM is a standard? Interesting perspective.

SCIM follows the standard, so there is no reason for Emacs
not to do the same.

-- 
Juri Linkov
http://www.jurta.org/emacs/

Re: Status of IPA patch?

[Juri Linkov]

>  > >  > The omission of those two was intentional, since U+20A7 is
>  > >  > equivalent to tʃ (note that that digraph doesn’t include the tie
>  > >  > that would be necessary to have it as a phoneme distinct from /t/
>  > >  > followed by /ʃ/) and g is equivalent to U+0261 for the purposes of
>  > >  > the IPA.
>  >
>  > I don’t understand why do you omit U+20A7 and U+0261 if they exist in
>  > X-SAMPA and Kirshenbaum?
>
> The IPA standards (which X-SAMPA and Kirshenbaum build on) define _U+20A7_
> and _U+0261_ as being equivalent to _a succession of U+0074 and U+0283_, and
> _U+0067_, respectively. The former two code points just represent
> compatibility glyphs (with U+20A7 leading to needless confusion, since
> people might reasonably believe that it meant the same as U+0074 U+2040
> U+0283, including the tie I mention above).

Since these are three most popular ways to represent this sound,
I think we should support all of them:

1. a ligature ʧ (U+02A7)
2. two symbols tʃ (U+0074 U+0283)
3. two symbols joined with a tie t͡ʃ (U+0074 U+2040 U+0283)

This can be done with a non-deterministic quail guidance string
displaying a menu of possible variants.

> Kirshenbaum mentions ASCII g as mapping to both U+0067 and U+0261 without
> comment. Including both would not add to the semantic range of what the user
> can input (in terms of the IPA), and would again be needlessly confusing
> (the user types g; wonders if 0 or 1 is more appropriate; when it doesn’t
> actually matter,

I agree there is no sense to create a menu of both U+0067 and U+0261,
so we should keep only the IPA symbol U+0261, because U+0067 is easy
to type anyway without an input method.

> and U+0067 is always more certain to be preserved by software).

The problem of preserving by software is not specific to U+0261,
but rather to the most of IPA symbols.

-- 
Juri Linkov
http://www.jurta.org/emacs/

Re: Status of IPA patch?

[Juri Linkov]

> My attempt to send this to emacs-pretest-bug earlier this month silently
> failed; maybe I’ll have more luck with emacs-devel, though in theory they’re
> the same list.

I don't know why your patch wasn't accepted.  Maybe you have no legal papers,
or it's because you need to split it to two steps where the first step is the
conversion to utf-8.  Also since all input methods in Emacs are grouped
by their name prefix, the names of new IPA input methods should be
"ipa-kirshenbaum" and "ipa-x-sampa".

-- 
Juri Linkov
http://www.jurta.org/emacs/

Re: Status of IPA patch?

[Aidan Kehoe]

 Ar an t-ochtú lá is fiche de mí Lúnasa, scríobh Juri Linkov: 

 > > My attempt to send this to emacs-pretest-bug earlier this month
 > > silently failed; maybe I’ll have more luck with emacs-devel, though in
 > > theory they’re the same list.
 > 
 > I don't know why your patch wasn't accepted. Maybe you have no legal
 > papers, or it's because you need to split it to two steps where the first
 > step is the conversion to utf-8. Also since all input methods in Emacs
 > are grouped by their name prefix, the names of new IPA input methods
 > should be "ipa-kirshenbaum" and "ipa-x-sampa".

To make completion harder? 

I’ve signed papers assigning all my Emacs work to GNU; twice, in fact. 
http://mid.gmane.org/16816.39575.977351.530618.dm0@vm.parhasard.net and
http://mid.gmane.org/17502.9536.699823.232214@parhasard.net for the two
relevant timeframes. If the two-steps thing was an issue, no-one actually
said that, Stefan just asked for clarification about what I was doing.

Oleksandr, I’m not going to do any more work to get this patch integrated
into a program I don’t use and have no interest in using; I’ve put notable
time and thought over more than two years into it, and this is enough for
me. If you would like to have it integrated into GNU Emacs, please follow up
on this list and with Jurta; it probably won’t be necessary for you to do
any coding and as such, to send assignment papers to the FSF, just
shepherding the patch should be enough. 

-- 
¿Dónde estará ahora mi sobrino Yoghurtu Nghe, que tuvo que huir
precipitadamente de la aldea por culpa de la escasez de rinocerontes?

Re: Status of IPA patch?

[Juri Linkov]

>  > I don't know why your patch wasn't accepted. Maybe you have no legal
>  > papers, or it's because you need to split it to two steps where the first
>  > step is the conversion to utf-8. Also since all input methods in Emacs
>  > are grouped by their name prefix, the names of new IPA input methods
>  > should be "ipa-kirshenbaum" and "ipa-x-sampa".
>
> To make completion harder?

No, common prefixes make completion easier.

> I’ve signed papers assigning all my Emacs work to GNU; twice, in fact.
> http://mid.gmane.org/16816.39575.977351.530618.dm0@vm.parhasard.net and
> http://mid.gmane.org/17502.9536.699823.232214@parhasard.net for the two
> relevant timeframes. If the two-steps thing was an issue, no-one actually
> said that, Stefan just asked for clarification about what I was doing.

Thank you for your efforts.  I hope Stefan will decide what to do
with your patch now.

-- 
Juri Linkov
http://www.jurta.org/emacs/

Re: Status of IPA patch?

[Stefan Monnier]

>> > I don't know why your patch wasn't accepted. Maybe you have no legal
>> > papers, or it's because you need to split it to two steps where the first
>> > step is the conversion to utf-8. Also since all input methods in Emacs
>> > are grouped by their name prefix, the names of new IPA input methods
>> > should be "ipa-kirshenbaum" and "ipa-x-sampa".
>> To make completion harder?
> No, common prefixes make completion easier.

Not necessarily.  It makes "shortest unique prefix" longer, so you may
end up having to type more in order to select a particular value.
E.g. compare "C-u C-\ ki RET" to " "C-u C-\ ip-k RET".

>> I’ve signed papers assigning all my Emacs work to GNU; twice, in fact.
>> http://mid.gmane.org/16816.39575.977351.530618.dm0@vm.parhasard.net and
>> http://mid.gmane.org/17502.9536.699823.232214@parhasard.net for the two
>> relevant timeframes. If the two-steps thing was an issue, no-one actually
>> said that, Stefan just asked for clarification about what I was doing.
> Thank you for your efforts.  I hope Stefan will decide what to do
> with your patch now.

The problem is that I'm not in a position to judge.  If nobody see
a problem with it, feel free to install it.


        Stefan