[Indic-computing-devel] RE: ANARCHY OF KANNADA STANDARDS IN IT.

[<ar...@bg...>]

Dear Colleagues,

I presume that Mr. harsha you are replying to mails on behalf of the people (I have got it confirmed over phone from one of my friend in that group) whom I have quoted my mail. Hence my reply to this mail is not addressed to Mr. harsha personally but I am addressing it to the same group whom I quoted in my earlier mail.

Anbarasan : It is this annoying trick which is being followed by the 'Specific Group' for Kannada in standardising and developing NUDI for Kannada while blaming the developers. Why this 'Specific Group' never attempted to invent a technology to handle Kannada efficiently using ISCII on computers for the off-the-shelf applications. I leave it to your guess and further pacifying. 

KGP : Why you people never attempted to invent a technology to handle Tamil efficiently using ISCII ? and why are you people using TSCII ? 

Anbarasan : "You people" - who is this? It is me or Tamil community. By trying to link my identity with Tamil you are proving how immoral you people are. Instead of asking me this question that why Tamils have not attempted to invent technology to handle Tamil efficiently using ISCII? you should have bothered about Kannada since I have served Kannada Language from 1989. You are trying to hide this thirteen years of my service to Kannada Language and trying to isolate me in Kannada development on the digital media. I am dedicating myself in developing technology for all Indian Languages. I am not particular about any one language. Coming to my technology development in handling ISCII on computers. It is the SURABHI, the first "software only" technological solution (there were only two efforts on this direction one is at APPLESOFT the other was at CIIL Mysore, later on CDAC has announced their GIST Shell) developed to support ISCII on all text based application software on MS DOS. Thereby SURABHI supported MS DOS, Norton Editor, WordStar, Dbase, Lotus 1-2-3. This product was demonstrated at the exhibition organised at Vidhana soudha, Bangalore for the inauguration of Kannada Jagruthi varsha celebrations. The demonstration of SURABHI software was broadcast on the Bangalore Doordharshan on the computerisation efforts of Karnataka Government.

Every indic computing developer pretty well aware that the problem involved in implementing ISCII in MS Windows platforms to make use of ISCII in all the off the shelf application software like MS Office or StarOffice. I humbly submit that APPLESOFT is the only organization to demonstrate the possibility of using ISCII for internal storage with standard application software like Notepad, Wordpad, MS Word etc. I am quoting these two of my technological contributions to Indian Languages which enabled the most popular OS of the day. I would like to draw the attention of member of this forum to note that, it is this group continuously blamed the developers since the inception of KGP through mass media propaganda, fooled the media persons by claiming ISCII superiority on one hand and developing software using glyphs on the other hand. That is the reason I am trying to expose these people.

So, you are accepting that you have followed Tamil standardisation effort. You are referring to Tamil standardisation effort now to cover up your mischievous standards. While giving interviews or instigating others to write your standardisation efforts you people were conveniently hiding the fact that your standardisation efforts were based on Tamil, while so far claiming your standardisation efforts are first of its kind in India.

* Why only referring Tamil - with my own expenses incurring financial losses contributed to develop language standardisation efforts of all languages which I came to know.
* Why bother about whether anybody invented any new technology for Tamil or not.
* If Tamil got developed it would have been a model for people like you to copy and claim.
* Can you justify that if Tamil was not developed, you people also would not develop Kannada.

Since you people (Refer Dr. Pavanaja's interview with Frederick Noronha, "Kannada Connects" available on-line at http://www.blonnet.com/ew/2002/03/06/stories/2002030600090200.htm and "Kannada on the keyboard, finally" available at http://www.zdnetindia.com/print.html, he says "We feel the best solution is to have the storage in ISCII. Other solutions have attempted to tie up the user in their own software solutions") are claiming the ISCII is the most suitable for Kannada, it is your interest to develop/invent a technology to handle ISCII and not Tamils to invent technology of ISCII who are not accepting ISCII as a suitable standard for TAMIL. Same is the case with Unicode. That is the reason, why Tamilnadu Government attempted to make a scientific study on the alternate encoding mechanism which NO other Indian language has ever attempted. If you people have made any attempt to prove efficiency of KSCLP over ISCII/Unicode, why it is not published, you make it public.

TSCII is not a standard announced or endorsed by any government and hence TSCII is not a approved standard. TSCII is being promoted by people who don't accept the standards. TSCII may become a standard if the user community accepts it because of the failure of the standards. For your information, Tamilnadu Government has announced three prototype encoding standards based on character encoding, a bi-lingual glyph encoding, a monolingual glyph encoding. However, Character encoding standard is still pending. As of now only TAB and TAM  are the only standards for Tamil. If you need any further details why three encoding is needed for a language, you may refer to my paper presented in the Tamil Internet 1999 International seminar held at Chennai. If you don't get any information, you may come to my office and have a look into it. If you still not clear on the standardisation issues, you refer to my book on Evolving Tamil Standards which deals with aspects of existing and evolving standards. Further, you are free to contact me for any clarifications. If you don't wish to do so, we still continue on this forum.

In my opinion none of the font (the so called) standards can be accepted as standards as they are yet to be recognised by the standards body.

As you people always blame the developer, I have not seen any instance of such thing in Tamil computing. Moreover, there is no instances of unethical copying of technology like you people have done and blaming the developer.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Anbarasan : Later on, when the Specific Group reached the peak of confusion, came out with another altogether different set of character set as Kannada Standard Code for Language Processing. Strangely, the arguable special symbol for 'r' is left out in this character set. If KSCLP code set is meant for Language processing, then what else the other encodings ISCII/UNICODE etc., do. Does it mean that the Group is not aware of the sorting problems when they submitted the recommendation. Why the Government is insisting on SORTING order as per ISCII when KGP is allowed to do sorting based on KSCLP. Is it not a malpractice recommending two different standards based on altogether different principle and use it for self advantage. Are they not misleading the Kannada people, people of Karnataka and the Government of Karnataka. If Character encoding (KSCLP) is the most suitable for Kannada Language processing, why the same was not recommended for Unicode. Is it not a wonder? 

KGP : We have never came out with confusion, instead we are still using ISCII for storage in Nudi to maintain the National standards, where as design of ISCII never solves the sorting problems of Kannada so for sorting, searching and other language processing we are using  KSCLP as the INTERMEDIET CODE. and also as the govt. standard says "WE CAN NOT CHANGE OUR LANGUAGE RULES TO SUITE THE TECHNOLOGY, INSTEAD TECHNOLOGY HAS TO BE CHANGED TO SUIT THE LANGUAGE" and KSCLP is the best example for this. its true that KSCLP is most suitable for Kannada language processing, but since "wrong standards which were in ISCII, is also copied to Unicode" ( Its Realy a wonder ) and now consortium cannot modify the previous standard, the KSCLP recommended by KGP is not accepted by Unicode consortium. 

Anbarasan : You people are playing a dirty game by combining a dirty wordprocessor and dirty input interface and confuse the concerned Govt officials and journalist by false claims. Wherein, ISCII storage facility is provided only in the NUDI wordprocessor, while input interface of NUDI facilitates storing glyphs. Simillary, when you people claim Nudi is having sorting facility, can NUDI facilitate sorting in all application software where sorting facility for English is available. Definitely NO. Then why you people are misleading everyone by saying NUDI is having sorting facility. When NUDI is used as a keyboard interface with any off-the-shelf application for example say MS Word, the storage is still glyphs not ISCII as you are claiming. By making this kind of blind statements, you are also exposing your malpractice.

It is known for every one, who is involved with standards that the purpose of standard encoding is not solving the sorting problems but to achieve linguistic analysis (refer Unicode). To achieve sorting, a separate table needs to be maintained. So, a table designed to handle sorting issue can't be called as a standard for a language. Then why you people claim KSCLP(which is designed for sorting) as a standard for Kannada and recommend to Unicode consortium. Have you ever submited your KSCLP standard to MCIT or BIS for their consideration as a standard for Kannada. 

Let KSCLP be a most suitable standard for Kannada, when KGP has submitted the KSCLP proposed to Unicode consortium? through whom? what is the reference? who has represented KGP?, who has attended the Unicode consortium Meeting? why the same was not sent to Karnataka Government to forward the same? is that KGP has submitted the proposal directly to Unicode Consortium to project itself.

Which is the Govt order you are referring. Don't quote anything off the air, substantiate all your claims with appropriate reference/results.

If ISCII is a wrong standard, as you pointed out, the same wrong standard is also copied into Unicode. How dare you people are hiding the very fact that you people have prepared documentation for the same wrong Unicode and sent to Unicode consortium for its inclusion. It is to be noted that KSCLP is based on pure consonant approach where the Consonant and vowel combines (it also contains vowel signs or mathras, which is the secondary symbol of the vowels. For NLP the text is expected to be based on the Vowels and Consonants. For sorting, it is expected to be based on Vowel signs. Can the same text be available in two different encodings.) whereas ISCII/Unicode is based on vowelised consonant where the vowelised consonant joins with the mathras to form vowelconsonants (the vowels don't join with the consonants). Afterall KSCLP can be used only for sorting not NLP, which is based on the vowels and consonants. In KSCLP mathras are used to form vowelconsonants. Why you people claim both (KSCLP and Unicode) as standard. 
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Anbarasan : Let me focus on, how ambiguously they interpret the Language, which resulted in today's anarchy. Leave alone the complexities of script composition, Kannada has one special interpretation of consonant 'r' as in Karnataka when written in Kannada. Which is a most commonly used form of 'r'. The so called experts, instead of handling the complexity of 'r' in the software have introduced it as one of the symbol in the standards announced for Kannada Keyboard (reference Karnataka G.O sa am ka e 70 kaa 99 dated 4-2-1999). In this standard, 47 necessary Kannada characters and 4 symbols are listed for modern Kannada language issued by the secretariat of Kannada and Culture. 

KGP : The keyboard layout is designed by our experts is to suit all sorts of end users such as the users who are familier with using the Kanglish keyboard in Baraha, Typewriter users, KP Rao layout users, and the DOE layout users. After a discussion it is found that DOE layout is most horrible which is very difficult to learn and the number of keystrokes are more. Kanglish layout in Baraha is offcource easy for Kanglish users but it will be difficult for the users who dont know english, ( A user has to learn english to work with Kannada software Baraha ) and offcource it is not a Kannada keyboard layout its a standard English Keyboard. KP Rao layout is most suitable to all ( Even for those who are using Baraha ) and is very easy to lean ( Its proved ). So KGP finaly came out with KP Rao Keyboard layout with some some small changes which were recomonded by expers. 

Anbarasan : You have not answered the basic question of why the dual interpretation of 'r' is included in the keyboard standard as separate key. 

I am interested in evolving the best of the features for a standard as such, can you publish your findings on Inscript keyboard, let people know how horrible is DOE keyboard!. Without any substantiable study or findings and without disclosing any such study if at all you have carried out, no one will buy your statements.

"Discuss and discard" is the way you people have evolved all the standards without any scientific study or implementation.

How your keyboard is proved over others, any sensible debate/discussions needs scientific findings.

As you cry for the heavenliness of the development you made, can you point out the discussion forums/e-groups/details on the committees who have discussed/studied/proved the greatness of your standards. Can you at least point out any RFC for these developments. Or at least can you list out the design principles of the standards, in my argument, you people didn't have any design principles either for keyboard layout design or Font design or prescribed minimum feature for Kannada software.

When Baraha input method can be used only by those who know English as you point out, How come KP Rao keyboard can be used without learning English. Afterall, the Kannada letters in the KP Rao keyboard layout were mapped based on the English letters. The fact is, you people wanted to take advantage of default English keyboard to learn / remember the Kannada keys by foregoing the advantage of designing a keyboard based on scientific study like frequency analysis and linguistic analysis.
-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Anbarasan : Can any one list out the ten features that KGP has provided with NUDI as claimed by the Specific Group. NUDI, purported to be the benchmark software has been developed with non-standard fonts like English numerals, bi-lingual fonts, No conversion utilities. 

KGP : Font with English numerals can not be a non standard font since portabality will be there. It is just provided for the convience of user. When talking about Nudi  its not a full fledged word Processor. It is a Keyboard driver which works for layout specified by Govt. Of Karnataka, and some fonts with Govt standards. Nudi ( Latest is 3.0 Release 2 ) comes with many features as fallows. 

- Sorting is provided as per the "Kannada Sahitya" which is there in none of other Kannada Softwares which were only developed for DTP operators. 

- SDK is provided with conversion functions from and to all types of codes like KSCLP, ISCII, Bi-Lingual Glyph, Monolinugual glyph, in-built keyboard engine which can be used by any developers to develop Kannada applications "which are not only meant for DTP operators".

-Template files given for MS-Word and MS-Excel ( available in Release 2 ) which allows to sort search and to use many other features which are available in MS-Word, MS-Excel. 

Anbarasan : Nobody accept NUDI as a software, it crudely provides input interface that's all. It is not even a driver as claimed by you.

What is the Govt standard? Govt standard only contains Glyphs for Kannada script, Kannada Numerals, and Punctuation marks Govt never announced any standard with Bi-lingual nature, if anything is there, you would have given reference to that. In the absence of any standard for Bi-lingual fonts, don't claim that NUDI comes with Government standard fonts and a software based on a standard has to follow the standards. You people could have added additional features but not the fonts based on the proprietory encoding. You people have implemented bi-lingual fonts to establish monopoly by taking undue advantage by implementing this non-standard font in the e-governance projects. It is sure that this is going to messup the data while migrating to another encoding say Unicode.

As you have copied the methodology of our software which were given for testing, evaluation and certification. You have copied the methodology of providing sorting facility in MS Word in NUDI, your claim of no software were developed with sorting is false and intentional to defame and gain undue advantage and fame for yourself. The proof of our software SURABHI having sorting facility is the test report given by the KGP.

"Standardisation is somethig that has to be imposed" says Dr. Pavanaja in the interview quoted elsewhere in this mail. You people must understand that standards can't be imposed. You people can play the dirty game only to gain monopoly in the Kannada software field by introducing the non-standard fonts like Bi-lingual fonts as you have introduced with NUDI and in the e-governance projects of Government of Karnataka. It is sure that your monopoly act would only result in bottleneck for Kannada in further development.

You are still accusing the developer (you are trying to be out of the developer community) while still following the same age old methodology. It is a unfair game you people have just started. Atlast, you are accepting you are not a developer but you are a tinkerer. That is why you have taken a sample code and tinkered around to put UI in Kannada and claimed you have developed the controversial NUDI.

Do you people have developed the NUDI software without funding from Government. Even after receiving fund from the Government you people are conveniently hiding the fact that NUDI is funded by the Government. It is also true that you people are distributing NUDI for Rs.100.00 per copy (while spending only 20% of it, it means that you are making 80% profit) without any training or support. 

My accusation is that you people are getting funds from the Government and try to build your foundations for future business prospects by monopolising Kannada software industry with the help of the officials of Directorate of Information Technology. Dr. Pavanaja's Visvakannada Softech is the example of this type. 

-----------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

Anbarasan : Kannada has become a victim of jealousy KGP. 

I wish Kannada with its outstanding 2300 years of survival and very rich literary contribution has to face this challenge and expose the erratic management of Kannada standards by KGP to maintain its sustained growth and enthronement on digital media.

With my everlasting love and creed towards Kannada Kasthuri I have taken your precious time. I welcome your views on this subject.

KGP : Kannada was a victim of jealousy Kannada Software developers who developed keyboard drivers with some ( Beautiful fontS ) just to attract DTP operators and make money they were never thought of developing some standards for glyph and storage ( if they do this  they will loose customers ). Now there game is end!. 

THANK GOD FINALLY SOME STANDARDS HAS COME. 

I wish Kannada with its outstanding 2300 years of survival and very rich literary contribution has to face this challenge and support standards provided by Govt. Of. Karnataka. 

With my everlasting love and creed towards Kannada I welcome your comments on this subject. 

Anbarasan : Your accusation on the Kannada software developers that the developers never contributed in developing standards is like a daylight robbery. It tentamounts to show the most vulnerable ungrateful re-course on those who have spent their everything for the noble cause of beloved languages on digital media. After the committee on standardising glyphs and codes have submitted the draft version, the same was sent to the developers for their comments. Developers of SURABHI, BARAHA, SHREE LIPI have contributed details on the usability of codes, organising the glyphs etc. The present standard is the witness for how much of the developers comments have helped in evolving the standard. By hiding their contributions, you are exposing your integrity (which is being questioned). It is unfortunate that the Government is sponsoring your activities and colluded with you people.

I thought you people only copy the methodology and technolgy invented by others but your reply proves you are copying even the writings (feelings).

N. ANBARASAN
email : ar...@bg... , phone : +91-080-3386167.