Well, my view is, it really depends on what we would like to achieve. If we want to encode the quran with all the linguistic feature and tajweed information embeded, that this probably the best way to go. However, there are 2 drawback: I don't see unicode have the support for it now, or willing to support for it. Maybe Thomas knows better. Second, no off the shelves will be able to support it either, thus we need to develop ourselves. I don't see this one easy either, because even the current quran program is not moving much.
So, to get as much support as we can, I think the best is to propose what is the simplest of all: just include the sequential tanween, 3 new codepoint to unicode. That's it.(of course , some other codepoint need to be added as well in order to render the quran properly) It will be the easiest to application developer also. If we were to encode the tajweed as well as other liguistic information , I think that's where XML come into picture. As for searching, the get the most accurate result is to develop the algorithm for it. This, we can't escape from rolling our own. However, this is better than the first situation, where no application can support even for rendering it, let alone to search. If we succeed in embeding the tajweed and liguistic information using XML, with all the searching algorithm in place, I think only then a new proposal can be submitted to unicode for their support. Wassalam. On 6/23/05, Abdulhaq Lynch <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: > On Wednesday 22 June 2005 14:21, Gregg Reynolds wrote: > > > > > But we also should not hesitate to use the purely descriptive > > terminology of modern linguistics. Remember most of the implementers > > who look at the encoding will have little or no Arabic. Terms like > > "idgham" are definitely preferred as official names, but they should be > > accompanied by a precise English-language definition. > > > > If by implementers you mean the IT guys coding up fonts and font renderers, > then I don't expect them to know modern english linguistic terms either. They > will need clear instructions on how the encoding is to be used, whatever > terminology is employed. > > If you are talking about those like yourself and myself, i.e. interested in > arabic and the quran, then I should say that a few days spent learning the > basics of tajweed would provide enormous benefit to them in terms of > understanding the symbols they're looking at. This applies to arabs and > non-arabs alike. > > wassalaam > abdulhaq > > > > Or, maybe not. Maybe we should write the encoding design and rational > > in Arabic as the primary reference, and then translate to English. > > Modern Arabic has modern linguistic terminology too. I rather prefer > > this approach, myself. > > > > -g > > _______________________________________________ > > General mailing list > > [email protected] > > http://lists.arabeyes.org/mailman/listinfo/general > _______________________________________________ > General mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.arabeyes.org/mailman/listinfo/general >
_______________________________________________ General mailing list [email protected] http://lists.arabeyes.org/mailman/listinfo/general
