Re: Rendering of U+0653 ARABIC MADDAH ABOVE

2011-07-20 Thread Bob Hallissy
On 2011-07-20 at 15:10 Roozbeh Pournader wrote: Definitely the madda above the vowel, to take care of Koranic scenarios. For example, some annotation styles of the Koran may commonly include the sequence to indicate an elongated [u:] sound. There, the madda clearly goes over the damma. Than

Re: Rendering of U+0653 ARABIC MADDAH ABOVE

2011-07-20 Thread Petr Tomasek
On Wed, Jul 20, 2011 at 02:42:32PM -0500, Bob Hallissy wrote: > Wondering if anyone knows (or has an educated guess): > > When an Arabic combining character sequence includes both > > * U+0653 ARABIC MADDAH ABOVE and > * an Arabic vowel mark above (e.g., U+064E ARABIC FATHA or maybe >U+065A

Re: Rendering of U+0653 ARABIC MADDAH ABOVE

2011-07-20 Thread Roozbeh Pournader
On Wed, 2011-07-20 at 14:42 -0500, Bob Hallissy wrote: > Wondering if anyone knows (or has an educated guess): > > When an Arabic combining character sequence includes both > * U+0653 ARABIC MADDAH ABOVE and > * an Arabic vowel mark above (e.g., U+064E ARABIC FATHA or maybe >

Rendering of U+0653 ARABIC MADDAH ABOVE

2011-07-20 Thread Bob Hallissy
Wondering if anyone knows (or has an educated guess): When an Arabic combining character sequence includes both * U+0653 ARABIC MADDAH ABOVE and * an Arabic vowel mark above (e.g., U+064E ARABIC FATHA or maybe U+065A ARABIC VOWEL SIGN SMALL V ABOVE), should the maddah be rendered above the

Re: Quick survey of Apple symbol fonts (in context of the Wingding/Webding proposal)

2011-07-20 Thread Philippe Verdy
2011/7/18 Asmus Freytag : > On 7/17/2011 12:19 PM, Philippe Verdy wrote: >> >> Another alternative: instead of encoding separate symbols for each >> control, we could as well encode symbols for each character visible in >> those symbols. > > I'm baffled: what problem is this elaborate scheme trying