>From: Roozbeh Pournader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>
>Ok, it seems that we are seeing a lot of monolouges here. Just tell me
>when it finished, so I can tell you again the only reason why we should
>not use the U+06C0 character for encoding Persian text. It's about
>something named 'normalization', as I already told. You will have two ways
>to encode the same text, with no considerations for them being equivalent
>(unlike Vav+Hamze). If you want something official from the Unicode
>Consortium, wait a while: it will be passed in the next Unicode Technical
>Committee meeting, and they will remove the mention of "Persian" from the
>description of the character in Unicode charts.
>
>roozbeh
>
I have been away from my mail box for a few days, and so I did not have the
chance to reply to this tirade. But I was interested to read the exchanges.
In my previous message I had not said anything about U+06C0 or
�normalisation�. It had nothing to do with that. I don�t know where you got
that idea from. Perhaps you should go back and read it again, and come up
with a more sensible reply.
If these exchanges look like a �monologue� (or perhaps a �dialogue�),
perhaps that is because not many people have registered on this mailing
list, or if they have, they choose not to participate.
I am not going to �finish�. You finish! If you want me to �finish�, you will
have to shut down your mailing list; and judging by the amount of
participation taking place on in it, it probably wouldn�t do any harm if you
did. Running a one-man show!
I suggest you read my messages more carefully in the future if you intend to
reply to them. I don�t know what you are talking about.
Abi
_________________________________________________________________
Join the world�s largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail.
http://www.hotmail.com
_______________________________________________
FarsiWeb mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/farsiweb
