On Sat, Apr 06, 2002 at 12:27:20AM +0900, Dan Kogai wrote:
> On Friday, April 5, 2002, at 11:18 , Jarkko Hietaniemi wrote:
> > Since it seems that we won't make it for Monday the 8th (MakeMaker is
> > still unfinished, and UTF-8 keys are still a bit dodgy, and so on), I
> > guess small updates on Encode (docs certainly, and obvious bugs) are
> > still okay-- and even the Farsi encodings, but please first ask
> > Roozbeh Pournader ( [EMAIL PROTECTED] ) the guy that seems to be
> > behind much of the Farsi computing stuff, whether (a) we should/could
> > include the Farsi mappings (b) which mappings (c) there are additional
> > complications we are not aware of (e.g. is it really just a simple
> > table mapping, or is something algorithmic needed).
> 
> I think you are mistaken Farsi for Indics.  Farsi is extended Arabic 
> (script, that is) and it is indeed supported in MacFarsi already.  BIDI 
> is tough but Encode does not (have to) care.

No, I'm not mistaken, I know that Farsi and Indics are different.
While Googling for the Farsi encodings I just got worried by the
frequent mentions of the bidi complications.  But Roozbeh would know
for certain, instead of us non-Farsi trying to sound like experts...

-- 
$jhi++; # http://www.iki.fi/jhi/
        # There is this special biologist word we use for 'stable'.
        # It is 'dead'. -- Jack Cohen

Reply via email to