> On Yau al-Thulatha 19 Rabi` al-Thaani 1425 05:50 pm, Mete Kural wrote: > > > I took a quick look and concluded that the document > > > is a bit misguided. I > > > call it so, because Unicode does not encode GLYPHS, > > > it encodes CHARACTERS. > > No no they are CHARACTERS not GLYPHS since they have different meanings. It's > not a matter of shape. Some one should explain this Mr. Thomas Milo (already > subscribed here) and others involved, am I wrong?
Let's see if my subscription works. If you mean characters, don't call them glyphs. > > > As you may have observed on the Unicode mailing > > > list, I just tabled this > > > subject. In observed, among others, that what this > > > proposal calls > > > "sequential fathatan" etc. can just as well be > > > called "repeated fatha" etc., > > You mean I need to put two fatha's one behind the others to represent it? Why > not? Umm! > > > > > There is no need to include ligatures including > > > trailing alifs etc., because > > > the Unicode standard is not a glyph list. The block > > > of Presentation Forms > > > should be ignored, it was a mistake. > > What is the mistake? Presentation Forms? I think Unicode is something you need > a lot of reading to understand fully. :( Well, here's where the difference between glyphs and characters is the clue. What you see are characters, what you understand are characters. For instance, you see a ligature (glyph) you understand two ore three characters. Glyphs are for font technology, characters are encoded. Thomas Milo DecoType http://www.unicode.org/iuc/iuc25/b051.html _______________________________________________ General mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.arabeyes.org/mailman/listinfo/general
