>From: Roozbeh Pournader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>Date: Wed, 5 Jun 2002 14:22:19 +0430 (IRST)
>
>You did not say anything about Normalization. That's more than correct.
>But the only reason for not allowing U+06C0 in the standard, is its
>cannonical decomposition. That weighs down all other reasoning. BTW, I got
>the idea from Unicode. Where else? ;)

I was not referring to allowing or disallowing U+06C0 either. I still don't 
know what you are talking about.

>I have read all your posts, and I think they should have been
>informational for some of the subscribers. But I am mainly talking about:
>
>       http://lists.sharif.edu/pipermail/farsiweb/2002-May/000266.html
>
>Which I replied with:
>
>       http://lists.sharif.edu/pipermail/farsiweb/2002-May/000267.html

In this message I made reference to two group of people: those who were 
trying to tell us "how to write the <ezafeh>", and those were now trying to 
tell us "how to write the <hamzeh>". In the first instance I was referring 
to a lot of people in general, who have this kind of attitude, not 
necessarily those on this mailing list. Perhaps all those who drafted the IT 
standard fall into this category, I woldn't know. In the second instance I 
was specifically referring to a message posted by Khanban. I think that he 
got my meaning, and gave a reply to it, so that makesus even.

>and again:
>
>       http://lists.sharif.edu/pipermail/farsiweb/2002-June/000276.html

This is a long one. I will have to get a printout and read it more carefully 
before giving you a reply.

Abi



_________________________________________________________________
Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp.

_______________________________________________
FarsiWeb mailing list
[EMAIL PROTECTED]
http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/farsiweb

Reply via email to