On Sun, 14 Apr 2013 13:44:26 +0600 Christopher Fynn <[email protected]> wrote:
> In practice, the rendering of Tibetan appears to be far less complex > than that of Khmer (with its coeng joiner) or that of Indic. That's largely because Tibetan puts the consonants in a simple vertical stack with the vowels at the top and bottom. Khmer has to worry about subscripts consonants with spacing ascenders to the left and spacing ascenders to the right. Further, the top-to-bottom length of the ascenders depends on what is in the stack above the body of such subscripts. Richard.
