Re: [farsiweb]Farsi and Arabic typography with hamzeh
On Wed, 5 Jun 2002, Abi Lover wrote: > In my previous message I had not said anything about U+06C0 or > normalisation. It had nothing to do with that. I dont know where you got > that idea from. Perhaps you should go back and read it again, and come up > with a more sensible reply. You did not say anything about Normalization. That's more than correct. But the only reason for not allowing U+06C0 in the standard, is its cannonical decomposition. That weighs down all other reasoning. BTW, I got the idea from Unicode. Where else? ;) You may be correct in all your reasoning, but we are not talking about technology available at the minute, or using all of one's options, or even keyboards that can't generate two characters for a single key. We are talking about interoperable text processing. > If these exchanges look like a monologue (or perhaps a dialogue), > perhaps that is because not many people have registered on this mailing > list, or if they have, they choose not to participate. They looked liked monologues, because people did not reply to each other case by case. They posted them like announcements. (I don't have anything to tell about participation. There are many subscribers that have talked at the right moment, and there are many others who are just interested in listening.) > I am not going to finish. You finish! If you want me to finish, you will > have to shut down your mailing list; and judging by the amount of > participation taking place on in it, it probably wouldnt do any harm if you > did. Running a one-man show! I didn't ask you to finish. I asked you to tell me when you had done all your reasoning, and there is nothing else remaining on the issue. "When the dust settles" should have been the proper phrase. > I suggest you read my messages more carefully in the future if you intend to > reply to them. I dont know what you are talking about. I have read all your posts, and I think they should have been informational for some of the subscribers. But I am mainly talking about: http://lists.sharif.edu/pipermail/farsiweb/2002-May/000266.html Which I replied with: http://lists.sharif.edu/pipermail/farsiweb/2002-May/000267.html and again: http://lists.sharif.edu/pipermail/farsiweb/2002-June/000276.html You did not reply to any of them. Would you please reply? roozbeh ___ FarsiWeb mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/farsiweb
Re: [farsiweb]Farsi and Arabic typography with hamzeh
>From: Roozbeh Pournader <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> > >Ok, it seems that we are seeing a lot of monolouges here. Just tell me >when it finished, so I can tell you again the only reason why we should >not use the U+06C0 character for encoding Persian text. It's about >something named 'normalization', as I already told. You will have two ways >to encode the same text, with no considerations for them being equivalent >(unlike Vav+Hamze). If you want something official from the Unicode >Consortium, wait a while: it will be passed in the next Unicode Technical >Committee meeting, and they will remove the mention of "Persian" from the >description of the character in Unicode charts. > >roozbeh > I have been away from my mail box for a few days, and so I did not have the chance to reply to this tirade. But I was interested to read the exchanges. In my previous message I had not said anything about U+06C0 or normalisation. It had nothing to do with that. I dont know where you got that idea from. Perhaps you should go back and read it again, and come up with a more sensible reply. If these exchanges look like a monologue (or perhaps a dialogue), perhaps that is because not many people have registered on this mailing list, or if they have, they choose not to participate. I am not going to finish. You finish! If you want me to finish, you will have to shut down your mailing list; and judging by the amount of participation taking place on in it, it probably wouldnt do any harm if you did. Running a one-man show! I suggest you read my messages more carefully in the future if you intend to reply to them. I dont know what you are talking about. Abi _ Join the worlds largest e-mail service with MSN Hotmail. http://www.hotmail.com ___ FarsiWeb mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/farsiweb
Re: [farsiweb]Farsi and Arabic typography with hamzeh
Ok, it seems that we are seeing a lot of monolouges here. Just tell me when it finished, so I can tell you again the only reason why we should not use the U+06C0 character for encoding Persian text. It's about something named 'normalization', as I already told. You will have two ways to encode the same text, with no considerations for them being equivalent (unlike Vav+Hamze). If you want something official from the Unicode Consortium, wait a while: it will be passed in the next Unicode Technical Committee meeting, and they will remove the mention of "Persian" from the description of the character in Unicode charts. roozbeh On Sat, 1 Jun 2002, Abi Lover wrote: > > > The implementation of the in the Farsi and Arabic typography > presents certain difficulties, because its vertical (and horizontal) > distance varies depending on where it is positioned in the text. It can be > positioned vertically anywhere above or below the , and a wide range > of distances in between. Its horizontal distance can also vary widely > because the width of the characters on which it can be positioned can vary, > as well as its location on the characters. For these reasons it is very > difficult to create a font with a single which can be correctly > positioned on any location required. In the new OpenType font standard it > does provide sophisticated techniques to enable you to do that, but with the > older TrueType and PostScript fonts that is very difficult, if not > impossible. For these reasons the most efficient way to generate these > characters is in the form of ligatures, or better still, as individual > Unicode glyphs. As it turns out, Unicode does indeed recognise each of these > shapes as individually coded glyphs, so there is no problem. The only > exception to this rule seems to be the Farsi . But that is not > the fault of Unicode. It is up to the Iranians to ensure that their language > is properly represented in Unicode. > > In the in the final version of the Persian IT standard published on the > Internet, it is suggested that this shape can be typed by typing the > individual characters followed by the . There are two reasons > why that is not the best solution. The first is the one given above. The > second is the fact that this shape is so common in Farsi that it is more > economical to be able to type it with one keystroke rather than two. A > better solution is either to represent it as a ligature, or better still, to > ensure that it is recognised in Unicode as an independent glyph with a > unique code value. It also means that it should be supported in the Farsi > keyboard standard by being assigned an independent key. > > Unicode is not interested in the meanings given to a character in a given > language. It is only interested in their physical representation. It is up > to the individual languages to interpret each character according to the > rules of each language. In Farsi, a placed above a has very > different significance than one placed above . But to Unicode it is > just . > > Abi > > > > _ > Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp. > > ___ > FarsiWeb mailing list > [EMAIL PROTECTED] > http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/farsiweb > -- Note: If you want me to read a message, please make sure you include my address in "To" or "CC" fields. I may not be able to follow all the discussions on the mailing lists I subscribe. Sorry. (No, there's no problem to receive duplicates.) ___ FarsiWeb mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/farsiweb
[farsiweb]Farsi and Arabic typography with hamzeh
The implementation of the in the Farsi and Arabic typography presents certain difficulties, because its vertical (and horizontal) distance varies depending on where it is positioned in the text. It can be positioned vertically anywhere above or below the , and a wide range of distances in between. Its horizontal distance can also vary widely because the width of the characters on which it can be positioned can vary, as well as its location on the characters. For these reasons it is very difficult to create a font with a single which can be correctly positioned on any location required. In the new OpenType font standard it does provide sophisticated techniques to enable you to do that, but with the older TrueType and PostScript fonts that is very difficult, if not impossible. For these reasons the most efficient way to generate these characters is in the form of ligatures, or better still, as individual Unicode glyphs. As it turns out, Unicode does indeed recognise each of these shapes as individually coded glyphs, so there is no problem. The only exception to this rule seems to be the Farsi . But that is not the fault of Unicode. It is up to the Iranians to ensure that their language is properly represented in Unicode. In the in the final version of the Persian IT standard published on the Internet, it is suggested that this shape can be typed by typing the individual characters followed by the . There are two reasons why that is not the best solution. The first is the one given above. The second is the fact that this shape is so common in Farsi that it is more economical to be able to type it with one keystroke rather than two. A better solution is either to represent it as a ligature, or better still, to ensure that it is recognised in Unicode as an independent glyph with a unique code value. It also means that it should be supported in the Farsi keyboard standard by being assigned an independent key. Unicode is not interested in the meanings given to a character in a given language. It is only interested in their physical representation. It is up to the individual languages to interpret each character according to the rules of each language. In Farsi, a placed above a has very different significance than one placed above . But to Unicode it is just . Abi _ Get your FREE download of MSN Explorer at http://explorer.msn.com/intl.asp. ___ FarsiWeb mailing list [EMAIL PROTECTED] http://lists.sharif.edu/mailman/listinfo/farsiweb
