Tibetan | |
---|---|
Range | U+0F00..U+0FFF (256 code points) |
Plane | BMP |
Scripts | Tibetan (207 char.) Common (4 char.) |
Major alphabets | Tibetan Dzongkha |
Assigned | 211 code points |
Unused | 45 reserved code points 2 deprecated |
Unicode version history | |
2.0 (1996) | 168 (+168) |
3.0 (1999) | 193 (+25) |
4.1 (2005) | 195 (+2) |
5.1 (2008) | 201 (+6) |
5.2 (2009) | 205 (+4) |
6.0 (2010) | 211 (+6) |
Unicode documentation | |
Code chart ∣ Web page | |
Note: [1] [2] When unifying with ISO 10646, the original Tibetan block was removed in Unicode 1.0.1. [3] The current block (with a new encoding model and a different range) was introduced in version 2.0. |
Tibetan is a Unicode block containing characters for the Tibetan, Dzongkha, and other languages of China, Bhutan, Nepal, Mongolia, northern India, eastern Pakistan and Russia.
Tibetan [1] [2] [3] Official Unicode Consortium code chart (PDF) | ||||||||||||||||
0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | A | B | C | D | E | F | |
U+0F0x | ༀ | ༁ | ༂ | ༃ | ༄ | ༅ | ༆ | ༇ | ༈ | ༉ | ༊ | ་ | ༌ NB | ། | ༎ | ༏ |
U+0F1x | ༐ | ༑ | ༒ | ༓ | ༔ | ༕ | ༖ | ༗ | ༘ | ༙ | ༚ | ༛ | ༜ | ༝ | ༞ | ༟ |
U+0F2x | ༠ | ༡ | ༢ | ༣ | ༤ | ༥ | ༦ | ༧ | ༨ | ༩ | ༪ | ༫ | ༬ | ༭ | ༮ | ༯ |
U+0F3x | ༰ | ༱ | ༲ | ༳ | ༴ | ༵ | ༶ | ༷ | ༸ | ༹ | ༺ | ༻ | ༼ | ༽ | ༾ | ༿ |
U+0F4x | ཀ | ཁ | ག | གྷ | ང | ཅ | ཆ | ཇ | ཉ | ཊ | ཋ | ཌ | ཌྷ | ཎ | ཏ | |
U+0F5x | ཐ | ད | དྷ | ན | པ | ཕ | བ | བྷ | མ | ཙ | ཚ | ཛ | ཛྷ | ཝ | ཞ | ཟ |
U+0F6x | འ | ཡ | ར | ལ | ཤ | ཥ | ས | ཧ | ཨ | ཀྵ | ཪ | ཫ | ཬ | |||
U+0F7x | ཱ | ི | ཱི | ུ | ཱུ | ྲྀ | ཷ | ླྀ | ཹ | ེ | ཻ | ོ | ཽ | ཾ | ཿ | |
U+0F8x | ྀ | ཱྀ | ྂ | ྃ | ྄ | ྅ | ྆ | ྇ | ྈ | ྉ | ྊ | ྋ | ྌ | ྍ | ྎ | ྏ |
U+0F9x | ྐ | ྑ | ྒ | ྒྷ | ྔ | ྕ | ྖ | ྗ | ྙ | ྚ | ྛ | ྜ | ྜྷ | ྞ | ྟ | |
U+0FAx | ྠ | ྡ | ྡྷ | ྣ | ྤ | ྥ | ྦ | ྦྷ | ྨ | ྩ | ྪ | ྫ | ྫྷ | ྭ | ྮ | ྯ |
U+0FBx | ྰ | ྱ | ྲ | ླ | ྴ | ྵ | ྶ | ྷ | ྸ | ྐྵ | ྺ | ྻ | ྼ | ྾ | ྿ | |
U+0FCx | ࿀ | ࿁ | ࿂ | ࿃ | ࿄ | ࿅ | ࿆ | ࿇ | ࿈ | ࿉ | ࿊ | ࿋ | ࿌ | ࿎ | ࿏ | |
U+0FDx | ࿐ | ࿑ | ࿒ | ࿓ | ࿔ | ࿕ | ࿖ | ࿗ | ࿘ | ࿙ | ࿚ | |||||
U+0FEx | ||||||||||||||||
U+0FFx | ||||||||||||||||
Notes |
Tibetan (Unicode 1.0.0) | |
---|---|
Range | U+1000..U+104F (80 code points) |
Plane | BMP |
Scripts | Tibetan |
Major alphabets | Tibetan Dzongkha |
Status | Deleted prior to the release of Unicode 2.0 |
Now occupied by | Myanmar |
Unicode version history | |
1.0.0 (1991) | 71 (+71) |
1.0.1 (1992) | 0 (-71) |
Chart | |
Code chart | |
Note: When unifying with ISO 10646, the original Tibetan block was deleted in Unicode 1.0.1. [3] Tibetan was later reintroduced with a new encoding model for Unicode 2.0. |
The Tibetan Unicode block is unique for having been allocated in version 1.0.0 with a virama-based encoding that was unable to distinguish visible srog med and conjunct consonant correctly. [note 1] This encoding was removed from the Unicode Standard in version 1.0.1 in the process of unifying with ISO 10646 for version 1.1, [3] then reintroduced as an explicit root/subjoined encoding, with a larger block size, in version 2.0. Moving or removing existing characters has been prohibited by the Unicode Stability Policy for all versions following Unicode 2.0, so the Tibetan characters encoded in Unicode 2.0 and all subsequent versions are immutable.
The range of the former Unicode 1.0.0 Tibetan block has been occupied by the Myanmar block since Unicode 3.0. In Microsoft Windows, collation data referring to the old Tibetan block was retained as late as Windows XP, and removed in Windows 2003. [4]
Tibetan (Unicode 1.0.0) [1] [2] Official Unicode Consortium code chart (PDF) | ||||||||||||||||
0 | 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 | 7 | 8 | 9 | A | B | C | D | E | F | |
U+100x | ཀ | ཁ | ག | ང | ཅ | ཆ | ཇ | ཉ | ཊ | ཋ | ཌ | ཎ | ཏ | ཐ | ད | ན |
U+101x | པ | ཕ | བ | མ | ཙ | ཚ | ཛ | ཝ | ཞ | ཟ | འ | ཡ | ར | ལ | ཤ | ཥ |
U+102x | ས | ཧ | ཨ | ི | ྀ | ུ | ེ | ོ | ྅ | ཿ | ཾ | ༽ | ||||
U+103x | ༷ | ྾ | ༄ | ། | ་ | ྃ | ྂ | ༔ | ༑ | ༈ | ༵ | ༼ | ཻ | ཽ | ||
U+104x | ༠ | ༡ | ༢ | ༣ | ༤ | ༥ | ༦ | ༧ | ༨ | ༩ | ༎ | ྄ | ༹ | |||
Notes |
The following Unicode-related documents record the purpose and process of defining specific characters in the Tibetan block:
Version | Final code points [lower-alpha 1] | Count | UTC ID | L2 ID | WG2 ID | Document |
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
2.0 | U+0F00..0F47, 0F49..0F69, 0F71..0F8B, 0F90..0F95, 0F97, 0F99..0FAD, 0FB1..0FB7, 0FB9 | 168 | X3L2/92-144 | N808 | Lofting, Peter; Ross, Hugh McGregor (1992-05-13), Comments on Tibetan Script | |
N1095 | Zhaxi, Nima, Proposal for encoding Tibetan script on BMP | |||||
N1185 | Proposal for encoding Tibetan script on BMP of ISO/IEC 10646 | |||||
N1159 | New consolidated Tibetan Proposal, 1995-03-10 | |||||
N1192 | Proposal Summary Form, Tibetan, 1995-03-28 | |||||
N1203 | Umamaheswaran, V. S.; Ksar, Mike (1995-05-03), "RESOLUTION M27.22", Unconfirmed minutes of SC2/WG2 Meeting 27, Geneva | |||||
UTC/1995-029 | Everson, Michael, Tibetan Character Set for Information Interchange (code chart) | |||||
UTC/1995-024B | Lofting, Peter (1995-05-31), Updated Tibetan Code Chart (U+xx00 - U+xxFF) | |||||
UTC/1995-xxx | "Tibetan Proposal and Report of Ad Hoc Committee", Unicode Technical Committee Meeting #65, Minutes, 1995-06-02 | |||||
N1227 | Anderson, Lloyd (1995-06-21), Tibetan in 10646 | |||||
N1238 | Proposal for encoding Tibetan script on BMP, 1995-06-24 | |||||
X3L2/95-090 | N1253 (doc, txt) | Umamaheswaran, V. S.; Ksar, Mike (1995-09-09), "6.4.5", Unconfirmed Minutes of WG 2 Meeting # 28 in Helsinki, Finland; 1995-06-26--27 | ||||
N1263 | Everson, Michael (1995-09-18), On the Complexity of Tibetan Character Names | |||||
N1538 | Table of Replies and Feedback on Amendment 6 – Tibetan, 1997-01-29 | |||||
L2/97-126 | N1562 | Paterson, Bruce (1997-05-27), Draft Report on JTC1 letter ballot on DAM No. 6 to ISO/IEC 10646-1 (Tibetan) | ||||
N1571 | Paterson, Bruce (1997-06-23), Almost Final Text – DAM 6 – Tibetan | |||||
L2/97-288 | N1603 | Umamaheswaran, V. S. (1997-10-24), "5.3.2", Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes, WG 2 Meeting # 33, Heraklion, Crete, Greece, 20 June – 4 July 1997 | ||||
N1739 | Paterson, Bruce (1998-05-06), Defect Report on AMD 6 - Tibetan | |||||
L2/99-010 | N1903 (pdf, html, doc) | Umamaheswaran, V. S. (1998-12-30), "11.2", Minutes of WG 2 meeting 35, London, U.K.; 1998-09-21--25 | ||||
L2/01-301 | Whistler, Ken (2001-08-01), "3-part Tibetan vowel signs with a-chung's", Analysis of Character Deprecation in the Unicode Standard | |||||
L2/03-267 | Duff, Tony (2003-08-18), Comments on Public Review Issue #12 (Terminal Punctuation) | |||||
L2/03-268 | Fynn, Christopher (2003-08-18), Unicode Tibetan [explanation of Unicode in Tibetan] | |||||
L2/05-073 | Freytag, Asmus; Fynn, Christopher (2005-02-09), Basic line Breaking rules for Tibetan, Dzongkha, & Ladakhi | |||||
L2/08-287 | Davis, Mark (2008-08-04), Public Review Issue #122: Proposal for Additional Deprecated Characters | |||||
L2/08-304 | Fynn, Christopher (2008-08-09), Tibetan Chars in PR 122 | |||||
L2/08-253R2 | Moore, Lisa (2008-08-19), "Consensus 116-C13", UTC #116 Minutes, Change the deprecated property by removing 0340, 0341, 17D3, and adding 0149, 0F77, 0F79, 17A4, 2329, 232A. | |||||
L2/08-328 (html, xls) | Whistler, Ken (2008-10-14), Spreadsheet of Deprecation and Discouragement | |||||
L2/11-261R2 | Moore, Lisa (2011-08-16), "Consensus 128-C6", UTC #128 / L2 #225 Minutes, Change the general category from "So" to "Po" ... [U+0F14] | |||||
3.0 | U+0F6A, 0F96, 0FAE..0FB0, 0FB8, 0FBA..0FBC, 0FBE..0FCC, 0FCF | 25 | L2/98-024 | N1660 | Everson, Michael (1997-12-08), Proposal to encode Tibetan Extensions in ISO/IEC 10646 | |
L2/98-070 | Aliprand, Joan; Winkler, Arnold, "3.A.2. item c. Tibetan Extensions", Minutes of the joint UTC and L2 meeting from the meeting in Cupertino, February 25-27, 1998 | |||||
L2/98-218 | N1756 | Anderson, Lloyd; Chilton, Robert; Duff, Tony; Everson, Michael; Fynn, Christopher; McGowan, Rick; Sirlin, Sam; Whistler, Ken; Умаков, Валерий (1998-05-27), Proposal for Tibetan Extensions to the UCS | ||||
L2/98-286 | N1703 | Umamaheswaran, V. S.; Ksar, Mike (1998-07-02), "8.8", Unconfirmed Meeting Minutes, WG 2 Meeting #34, Redmond, WA, USA; 1998-03-16--20 | ||||
L2/98-281R (pdf, html) | Aliprand, Joan (1998-07-31), "Extended Tibetan (IV.D.1.a)", Unconfirmed Minutes – UTC #77 & NCITS Subgroup L2 # 174 JOINT MEETING, Redmond, WA -- July 29-31, 1998 | |||||
N1864 | Comments on N1756 - Tibetan Extensions, 1998-09-17 | |||||
L2/98-330 | N1921 | Subdivision Proposal on JTC 1.02.18.01 for Amendment 31: Tibetan Extension to ISO/IEC 10646-1, 1998-10-28 | ||||
L2/98-331 | N1922 | Combined PDAM registration and consideration ballot on WD for ISO/IEC 10646-1/Amd. 31, AMENDMENT 31: Tibetan Extension, 1998-10-28 | ||||
L2/99-010 | N1903 (pdf, html, doc) | Umamaheswaran, V. S. (1998-12-30), "8.1.4 and 11.2", Minutes of WG 2 meeting 35, London, U.K.; 1998-09-21--25 | ||||
L2/99-079.2 | N1977R | DRAFT Irish Comments on SC 2 N 3212, 1999-01-19 | ||||
L2/99-079.1 | N1979R | Chinese Comments on SC 2 N 3212, 1999-01-27 | ||||
N1977 | Chinese comments on ISO/IEC 10646-1/PDAM 31: Tibetan Extension, 1999-01-27 | |||||
L2/99-079 | Summary of Voting on SC 2 N 3212, PDAM ballot on WD for ISO/IEC 10646-1/Amd. 31: Tibetan Extension, 1999-02-12 | |||||
N2022 | Paterson, Bruce (1999-04-05), FPDAM 31 Text - Tibetan Extensions | |||||
L2/99-111 | Text for FPDAM ballot of ISO/IEC 10646, Amd. 31 - Tibetan extensions, 1999-04-06 | |||||
L2/99-232 | N2003 | Umamaheswaran, V. S. (1999-08-03), "6.1.5 PDAM31 - Tibetan Extensions", Minutes of WG 2 meeting 36, Fukuoka, Japan, 1999-03-09--15 | ||||
L2/99-256 | N2070 | Summary of Voting on SC 2 N 3310, ISO 10646-1/FPDAM 31 - Tibetan extension, 1999-08-19 | ||||
L2/99-307 | N2129 | Paterson, Bruce (1999-09-20), Disposition of Comments Report on SC 2 N 3310, ISO/IEC 10646-1/FPDAM 31, AMD. 31: Tibetan extension | ||||
L2/99-308 | N2130 | Paterson, Bruce (1999-10-01), Revised Text for FDAM ballot of ISO/IEC 10646-1/FDAM 31, - AMD. 31: Tibetan extension | ||||
L2/99-352 | N2130R | ISO 10646-1, Amd. #31 -- Tibetan with correct code charts, 1999-11-01 | ||||
L2/99-361 | Everson, Michael (1999-11-09), Corrected text for ISO/IEC 10646-1/FDAM 31 -- Tibetan extension | |||||
L2/00-010 | N2103 | Umamaheswaran, V. S. (2000-01-05), "6.4.6", Minutes of WG 2 meeting 37, Copenhagen, Denmark: 1999-09-13—16 | ||||
L2/00-071 | Table of replies on ISO/IEC 10646-1: 1993/FDAM 31: Tibetan Extensions, 2000-03-02 | |||||
4.1 | U+0FD0..0FD1 | 2 | L2/04-007 | N2694 | Everson, Michael; Fynn, Christopher (2003-12-30), Proposal to encode two Bhutanese marks for Dzongkha in the UCS | |
5.1 | U+0F6B..0F6C | 2 | L2/05-338 | N3010 | West, Andrew (2005-10-25), Comments on N2985 -- Balti Tibetan additions | |
L2/05-279 | Moore, Lisa (2005-11-10), "Tibetan (C.7)", UTC #105 Minutes | |||||
N2953 (pdf, doc) | Umamaheswaran, V. S. (2006-02-16), "7.4.13", Unconfirmed minutes of WG 2 meeting 47, Sophia Antipolis, France; 2005-09-12/15 | |||||
L2/06-231 | Moore, Lisa (2006-08-17), "Scripts - Tibetan characters for Balti", UTC #108 Minutes | |||||
N3153 (pdf, doc) | Umamaheswaran, V. S. (2007-02-16), "M49.4", Unconfirmed minutes of WG 2 meeting 49 AIST, Akihabara, Tokyo, Japan; 2006-09-25/29 | |||||
L2/06-324R2 | Moore, Lisa (2006-11-29), "Consensus 109-C2", UTC #109 Minutes | |||||
L2/05-244 | N2985 | Everson, Michael (2009-09-04), Proposal to add four Tibetan characters for Balti to the BMP of the UCS | ||||
U+0FCE | 1 | L2/05-345R | N3011 | West, Andrew (2005-10-24), Proposal to encode one Tibetan astrological character | ||
L2/05-279 | Moore, Lisa (2005-11-10), "Tibetan (C.7)", UTC #105 Minutes | |||||
N3103 (pdf, doc) | Umamaheswaran, V. S. (2006-08-25), "M48.20a", Unconfirmed minutes of WG 2 meeting 48, Mountain View, CA, USA; 2006-04-24/27 | |||||
U+0FD2..0FD4 | 3 | L2/05-346 | N3012 | West, Andrew (2005-10-24), Proposal to encode three archaic Tibetan characters | ||
L2/05-347 | Fynn, Christopher (2005-10-27), Comments on: N3012 - Proposal to encode three archaic Tibetan characters | |||||
L2/05-364 | Fynn, Christopher (2005-11-03), Re: New Tibetan Proposals | |||||
L2/05-279 | Moore, Lisa (2005-11-10), "Tibetan (C.7)", UTC #105 Minutes | |||||
L2/06-043 | N3032 | West, Andrew (2006-01-30), Proposal to encode one Tibetan punctuation mark | ||||
L2/06-044 | N3033 | West, Andrew (2006-01-30), Proposal to encode two archaic Tibetan punctuation marks | ||||
L2/06-008R2 | Moore, Lisa (2006-02-13), "C.13", UTC #106 Minutes | |||||
N3103 (pdf, doc) | Umamaheswaran, V. S. (2006-08-25), "M48.20b, M48.20c", Unconfirmed minutes of WG 2 meeting 48, Mountain View, CA, USA; 2006-04-24/27 | |||||
N3153 (pdf, doc) | Umamaheswaran, V. S. (2007-02-16), "M49.1e", Unconfirmed minutes of WG 2 meeting 49 AIST, Akihabara, Tokyo, Japan; 2006-09-25/29 | |||||
L2/08-317 | Muller, Eric (2008-08-11), "1.8", South Asia Subcommittee Report | |||||
L2/08-253R2 | Moore, Lisa (2008-08-19), "Vedic (B.15.2, E.1)", UTC #116 Minutes | |||||
5.2 | U+0FD5..0FD8 | 4 | N3353 (pdf, doc) | Umamaheswaran, V. S. (2007-10-10), "M51.19", Unconfirmed minutes of WG 2 meeting 51 Hanzhou, China; 2007-04-24/27 | ||
L2/07-148 | N3268 | Everson, Michael; Fynn, Christopher; Scharf, Peter; West, Andrew (2007-05-09), Proposal to encode four religious characters in the Tibetan block | ||||
L2/07-118R2 | Moore, Lisa (2007-05-23), "Consensus 111-C19", UTC #111 Minutes | |||||
L2/09-060 | N3537 | Lata, Swaran (2008-10-14), Proposal to add India specific annotation to Right facing Svasti | ||||
L2/08-379 | Suignard, Michel (2008-10-21), "Ireland T5", Disposition of comments on SC2 N 3989 (PDAM text for Amendment 6 to ISO/IEC 10646:2003) | |||||
6.0 | U+0F8C..0F8F | 4 | L2/09-032 | N3568 | West, Andrew; Fynn, Christopher (2009-01-24), Proposal to encode four Tibetan-Sanskrit letters used in Kalacakra texts | |
L2/09-003R | Moore, Lisa (2009-02-12), "B.15.11", UTC #118 / L2 #215 Minutes | |||||
L2/09-234 | N3603 (pdf, doc) | Umamaheswaran, V. S. (2009-07-08), "M54.13d", Unconfirmed minutes of WG 2 meeting 54 | ||||
U+0FD9..0FDA | 2 | L2/09-033 | N3569 | West, Andrew (2009-01-24), Proposal to encode two Tibetan annotation marks | ||
L2/09-003R | Moore, Lisa (2009-02-12), "B.15.11", UTC #118 / L2 #215 Minutes | |||||
L2/09-234 | N3603 (pdf, doc) | Umamaheswaran, V. S. (2009-07-08), "M54.13e", Unconfirmed minutes of WG 2 meeting 54 | ||||
|
Unicode, formally The Unicode Standard, is a text encoding standard maintained by the Unicode Consortium designed to support the use of text in all of the world's writing systems that can be digitized. Version 15.1 of the standard defines 149813 characters and 161 scripts used in various ordinary, literary, academic, and technical contexts.
The Brahmic scripts, also known as Indic scripts, are a family of abugida writing systems. They are used throughout the Indian subcontinent, Southeast Asia and parts of East Asia. They are descended from the Brahmi script of ancient India and are used by various languages in several language families in South, East and Southeast Asia: Indo-Aryan, Dravidian, Tibeto-Burman, Mongolic, Austroasiatic, Austronesian, and Tai. They were also the source of the dictionary order (gojūon) of Japanese kana.
The byte-order mark (BOM) is a particular usage of the special Unicode character code, U+FEFFZERO WIDTH NO-BREAK SPACE, whose appearance as a magic number at the start of a text stream can signal several things to a program reading the text:
Malayalam script is a Brahmic script used commonly to write Malayalam, which is the principal language of Kerala, India, spoken by 45 million people in the world. It is a Dravidian language spoken in the Indian state of Kerala and the union territories of Lakshadweep and Puducherry by the Malayali people. It is one of the official scripts of the Indian Republic. Malayalam script is also widely used for writing Sanskrit texts in Kerala.
The Tibetan script is a segmental writing system, or abugida, derived from of Brahmic scripts and Gupta script, and used to write certain Tibetic languages, including Tibetan, Dzongkha, Sikkimese, Ladakhi, Jirel and Balti. It was originally developed c.620 by Tibetan minister Thonmi Sambhota for King Songsten Gampo.
The zero-width non-joiner is a non-printing character used in the computerization of writing systems that make use of ligatures. When placed between two characters that would otherwise be connected into a ligature, a ZWNJ causes them to be printed in their final and initial forms, respectively. This is also an effect of a space character, but a ZWNJ is used when it is desirable to keep the characters closer together or to connect a word with its morpheme.
Telugu script, an abugida from the Brahmic family of scripts, is used to write the Telugu language, a Dravidian language spoken in the Indian states of Andhra Pradesh and Telangana as well as several other neighbouring states. It is one of the official scripts of the Indian Republic. The Telugu script is also widely used for writing Sanskrit texts and to some extent the Gondi language. It gained prominence during the Eastern Chalukyas also known as Vengi Chalukya era. It shares extensive similarities with the Kannada script, as both of them evolved from the Bhattiprolu and Kadamba scripts of the Brahmi family. In 2008, the Telugu language was given the status of a Classical Language of India, in recognition of its rich history and heritage.
Indian Standard Code for Information Interchange (ISCII) is a coding scheme for representing various writing systems of India. It encodes the main Indic scripts and a Roman transliteration. The supported scripts are: Bengali–Assamese, Devanagari, Gujarati, Gurmukhi, Kannada, Malayalam, Oriya, Tamil, and Telugu. ISCII does not encode the writing systems of India that are based on Persian, but its writing system switching codes nonetheless provide for Kashmiri, Sindhi, Urdu, Persian, Pashto and Arabic. The Persian-based writing systems were subsequently encoded in the PASCII encoding.
Uniscribe is the Microsoft Windows set of services for rendering Unicode-encoded text, supporting complex text layout. It is implemented in the dynamic link library USP10.DLL. Uniscribe was released with Windows 2000 and Internet Explorer 5.0. In addition, the Windows CE platform has supported Uniscribe since version 5.0.
Virama is a Sanskrit phonological concept to suppress the inherent vowel that otherwise occurs with every consonant letter, commonly used as a generic term for a codepoint in Unicode, representing either
The zero-width joiner is a non-printing character used in the computerized typesetting of writing systems in which the shape or positioning of a grapheme depends on its relation to other graphemes, such as the Arabic script or any Indic script. Sometimes the Roman script is to be counted as complex, e.g. when using a Fraktur typeface. When placed between two characters that would otherwise not be connected, a ZWJ causes them to be printed in their connected forms.
A whitespace character is a character data element that represents white space when text is rendered for display by a computer.
The Lepcha script, or Róng script, is an abugida used by the Lepcha people to write the Lepcha language. Unusually for an abugida, syllable-final consonants are written as diacritics.
The Unicode Consortium and the ISO/IEC JTC 1/SC 2/WG 2 jointly collaborate on the list of the characters in the Universal Coded Character Set. The Universal Coded Character Set, most commonly called the Universal Character Set, is an international standard to map characters, discrete symbols used in natural language, mathematics, music, and other domains, to unique machine-readable data values. By creating this mapping, the UCS enables computer software vendors to interoperate, and transmit—interchange—UCS-encoded text strings from one to another. Because it is a universal map, it can be used to represent multiple languages at the same time. This avoids the confusion of using multiple legacy character encodings, which can result in the same sequence of codes having multiple interpretations depending on the character encoding in use, resulting in mojibake if the wrong one is chosen.
The Chakma Script, also called Ajhā pāṭh, Ojhapath, Ojhopath, Aaojhapath, is an abugida used for the Chakma language, and recently for the Pali language.
The zero-width space (ZWSP) is a non-printing character used in computerized typesetting to indicate where the word boundaries are, without actually displaying a visible space in the rendered text. This enables text-processing systems for scripts that do not use explicit spacing to recognize where word boundaries are for the purpose of handling line breaks appropriately. Zero-width space is unicode character U+200B
, and is located in the unicode General Punctuation block, and can be represented by HTML entities ​
or ​
.
Meteg is a punctuation mark used in Biblical Hebrew for stress marking. It is a vertical bar placed under the affected syllable.
Myanmar is a Unicode block containing characters for the Burmese, Mon, Shan, Palaung, and the Karen languages of Myanmar, as well as the Aiton and Phake languages of Northeast India. It is also used to write Pali and Sanskrit in Myanmar.
Mongolian is a Unicode block containing characters for dialects of Mongolian, Manchu, and Sibe languages. It is traditionally written in vertical lines Top-Down, right across the page, although the Unicode code charts cite the characters rotated to horizontal orientation as this is the orientation of glyphs in a font that supports layout in vertical orientation.
Tamil All Character Encoding (TACE16) is a scheme for encoding the Tamil script in the Private Use Area of Unicode, implementing a syllabary-based character model differing from the modified-ISCII model used by Unicode's existing Tamil implementation.