Meor Ridzuan Meor Yahaya wrote: >> I fully agree. 1/2 and 3/4 are all a single grapheme. They look like >> ducks, the quack like a ducks, they are b-y ducks. And like the >> hamza, the twindots are also to be encoded as a separate character > > So, you are suggesting to encode everything using a single code, which > probably something like 649.Then, encode the 2 dots, hamza, small > alefs seperately, right? Could you explain what is the benefit of > using this approach? First impression, I think it will make it more > difficult, especially for searching. For example, if I were to search > for normal yeh, I need to include the dot as well in my searching for > initial and medial form. But for standalone and final form, it is not > necessary, right?
Problems with searching or typing? Not at all. With your present input method you don't need to add dots separately either, so why would that be different with composite encoding? It could all be done with the same keyboard and the same keystrokes - though they will generate different codes, of course. The only difference would be the availability of extra precision in deleting (like with the lam-alef key on Latin "b") and the possibilty to enter any detail of the script as a separate Unicode point. t
_______________________________________________ General mailing list [email protected] http://lists.arabeyes.org/mailman/listinfo/general
