Abdulhaq Lynch wrote: >> Is the Unicode consortium wanting to encode all major types of mushaf >> (egyptian/saudi/South African/maghribii/nigerian etc), or just the >> cairo/saudi printed one? >> >> When we answer this, we'll be one step closer to the 'right' answer >> in respect to the Unicode aspect of things.
Unicode wants to encode writing systems, not conventions within a writing system nor graphic variantions for the same abstract units of writing that deal with a particular document. In the case of Mushafs, this means that if the same orthographic unit (grapheme) varies in form between Mushafs, but not in function. E.g. various instances of regional tamween forms that all boil down to the exact same thing), propose to encode the abstraction, do not bother them with calligraphic/typographic idosyncracies. By the same token, do not encode ras khaa, when it is a sukun (this one slupped through thenet because nobody knew why it was there). As a first step in digitization we should reduce all the units of script to their abstract essence and define their various appearances as regional variations/traditions that can be dealt with by font technology and text mark-up. t
_______________________________________________ General mailing list [email protected] http://lists.arabeyes.org/mailman/listinfo/general
