> For example, the
> number {7} in the Farsi character set and in the Arabic character sets look
> identical in appearance, but have different code numbers assigned to them
> (i.e. 06F7 and 0667 respectively).
Is this true? This is hard to believe. I wonder why? Seems a bit
extravagant but then this is out of my league.
--------
> We're listening, and reading all the debate. I will summarize all after
> all dust settles,
I can't wait! All this time I thought the debate was on whether this
character *exists* or not. I have not received any flames this time
telling me that it's no longer used so I guess that means this
discussion has served a useful purpose and we can move on to the
*implementation* stage?? Now it appears it is not clear if it is a
case of heh + a certain diacritic (hamzeh) or if heh + hamzeh is one
entity.
Well, in the latin subsets, one finds macrons, dots, accents etc both
alone and as part of various characters. If someone needs to type an "e"
with a macron, they have a way to do so. If they want to type one by
itself, they have that option as well. I'm sure no one involved in
implementing these ever discussed the Roman origins of these diacritics so
what does Arabic phonology have to do here, especially if there is an
ARabic #7 and a Persian #7 and they're both one and the same?
And I repeat, if the default font Times New Roman lacks this most basic
character and the people who make that font are not Persian experts
and are relying on incorrect info to make their font, what are we
supposed to do? Gif and JPG everything? A font lacking one letter is the
same as having no font at all.
Are we working towards the day when we can for example, scan and OCR
a medieval Persian text where Arabic and Persian words appear
side by side and to which we can insert some remarks in the contemporary
Persian style as well and post on the internet?
-Connie
_______________________________________________
FarsiWeb mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/farsiweb
