Hello Meor, Thanks for the confirmation that there is no tanween other than tanween with a meem/tamweem and sequential tanween/silent tanween that is not supported by Unicode.
>Any new projects? Tom is gonna present to the Unicode people in next months's Unicode conference in Florida God willing so I wanted to make sure that the list of missing Madina Mushaf Quranic features in Unicode is complete. So can you think of anything else than the below list that is not supported in Unicode: New character codes that are needed: ------------------------------------ - A new Arabic letter hamza is needed. This hamza will not be dis-joining like the current hamza 0621. When put between two joining letters it will not split them but float on top of them. New Protocols that are needed: ------------------------------ - The contexual variant of superscript alef that shifts position when preceded by a fatha needs to be clarified. There is no need for a new character code here, just an explanation that the current superscript alef does shift position when preceded by a fatha. - Tanween ending in meem: fathatan+superscript meem will trigger the "tamweem" symbol, and so forth for kasratan+superscript meem and dammatan+superscript meem. No new character code is needed, just a protocol that explains that the combination will trigger the corresponding glyph. - Silent/sequential tanween: fathatan+sukuun code will trigger the silent tanween/sequential tanween glyph, and so forth for kasratan+sukuun and dammatan+sukuun. Sukuun is a good choice for a codepoint here since the noon sound of the tanween is in a way silenced. No new character code is needed, just a protocol that explains that the combination will trigger the corresponding glyph. New canonical equivalences (this one is not absolutely needed for the Madinah Mushaf): ---------------------- - Basic tanween canonical equivalence: fatha+fatha needs to be made canonically equivalent to fathatan, and so on for kasratan and dammatan. Kind regards, Mete ---------- Original Message ---------------------------------- From: Meor Ridzuan Meor Yahaya <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> Reply-To: General Arabization Discussion <[email protected]> Date: Tue, 23 Aug 2005 11:25:05 +0800 >I think as far as tanween is concern, that's about it. Of course, this >only considering it's visual appearance according to the madinah >mushaf ( not the whole tajweed rule) > >Any new projects? > >On 8/20/05, Mete Kural <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote: >> Salaam Abdulhaq, Meor and all, >> >> I wanted to ask you to refresh my memory on something we discussed about in >> the discussions. >> >> As far as I remember we had decided that these tanweens are not currently >> supported in Unicode: >> >> - tanween with a meem/tamweem/? >> - sequential tanween/silent tanween/? >> >> Were there any other tanweens that are currently not supported by Unicode? >> >> Thank you, >> Mete >> >> -- >> Mete Kural >> Touchtone Corporation >> 714-755-2810 >> -- >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> General mailing list >> [email protected] >> http://lists.arabeyes.org/mailman/listinfo/general >> > > -- Mete Kural Touchtone Corporation 714-755-2810 --
_______________________________________________ General mailing list [email protected] http://lists.arabeyes.org/mailman/listinfo/general
