Hangul Jamo consonant or vowel clusters (was: Re: [idn] call for comments for REORDERING)

["Kent Karlsson" <kentk@md.chalmers.se>]

----- Original Message ----- 
From: "Martin Duerst" <duerst@w3.org>
...
> At 19:05 01/10/22 +0200, Karlsson Kent - keka wrote:
> 
> >And still it is not sufficient, since historic Hangul
> >Jamo aren't covered by the precomposed Hangul syllable
> >characters. I have also indications that many useful
> >consonant (and vowel?) clusters aren't covered as separate
> >(Jamo) characters, but have to be constructed from multiple
> >'more basic' (non-cluster) Hangu Jamo characters.
> 
> Now that's new to me. Can you provide some evidence
> (e.g. some scans)?

I don't have any scans, but a quote from the public Unicode mailing list.
In http://www.unicode.org/mail-arch/unicode-ml/y2001-m10/0253.html:
:Unicode Hangul Jamo block has about 220 Hangul Jamos used in modern Korean 
:and middle Korean. Why are there so many? Because instead of encoding only 
:17 consonants and 11 vowels (one can go further down the 'reductionist' 
:road and say that only several base consonants and a few base vowels 
:along with 'diacritical' elements are all necessary to represent/encode 
:Hangul. See p. 143 of Sampson), Unicode encodes all forms of 'composite 
:Jamos' (consonant clusters, 'double' consonants to represent tense 
:consonants, complex diphtongs, etc). However, this is not sufficient 
:and Microsoft Word 2002/Windows XP/MS IE 6.0 comes with truetype fonts 
:that can be used by 'Uniscribe' to combine dynamically Hangul Jamos 
:beyond a simple I.C + M. V. (+ F.C.) model (I.C. = initial consonant, 
:M.V. = medial vowel, F.C= final consonant) as described in Unicode 3.0 
:.......... 
:
:  Jungshik Shin 

I assume that this functionality is not included just for fun...

            Kind regards
            /kent k


> I use to write my last name as a Hangul syllable as a joke,
> but as the 'rst' combination doesn't turn up in as a final
> cluster, I have to do this using graphics. So I'm familliar
> with the problem. But I assumed that all actual combinations
> that have been used historically are actually available
> in the Unicode Jamo block.
> 
> 
> Regards,  Martin.