At 01:41 10/11/2001, [EMAIL PROTECTED] wrote:
>According to my understanding:
>
>Consider Lam+Alef. The <rlig> table should form a ligature.
>
>The sequence Lam+ZWNJ+Alef would produce non-joined sequence (i.e., final
>or isolate Lam followed by isolate Alef)
>
>However, the sequence Lam+ZWJ+ZWNJ+ZJW+Alef should produce joined Lam ALef
>*but no ligature* (i.e., medial or initial Lam followed by final Alef).
>(This would be used, e.g., in places where you want to document how
>Lam+Alef is *not* written :-)
>
>I don't know if this is implemented in Uniscribe or not, but I think that
>is where it belongs.
John Cowan also wrote to me to explain that ZWJ+ZWNJ+ZWJ is intended to
activate shaping while inhibiting ligatures. Thanks for the example, Bob,
this makes the concept a lot clearer. I would still like to know two things:
Why does Roozbeh think this is 'the worst thing in Unicode'?
Does Uniscribe do anything with such a combination?
John Hudson
Tiro Typeworks www.tiro.com
Vancouver, BC [EMAIL PROTECTED]
Type is something that you can pick up and hold in your hand.
- Harry Carter
