On Fri, 2004-06-11 at 20:09, Ordak D. Coward wrote: > I am confused! Why people spell "khaat" with two a's? First I though > it is a typo, but it seems everybody is writing it like that.
They perhaps wish to write it with two "t"s, but miss and type two "a".s > In my > opinion, this by itself makes Kufi a different 'script' than modern > Arabic. Then you may also wish to differentiate Gothic from normal Latin. But sorry, Unicode doesn't differentiate these, nor should good software. The logic is the same, the semantics are the same, so we can call it the same "script" (in Unicode terms). > Now, I guess my original suggestion of "Naskh" is technically correct, > if the following can add any weight to that choice: > http://www.ancientscripts.com/arabic.html > http://www.britannica.com/eb/article?eu=56293 No, Nastalig is OK for Persian, so is Tahriri. We shouldn't require Naskh, or restrict Persian writing to Naskh. roozbeh _______________________________________________ PersianComputing mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/persiancomputing
