> encoding of a Syriac Aliph-Wasla remains open. None of these options > have been formally dismissed. But if the separate Wasla is only needed > for the use in Syriac in the sepecific complinatioon with the Syriac > Aliph, it's probably best to encode only the Syriac Aliph-Wasla, as
I'm not completely sure whether the Wasla was not used in some Judaeo-arabic texts written with hebrew consonants but accompanied occasionally with Arabic vowels/diacritics/marks. I know for sure that SHADDA and DAMMA are used in such situtions (and some diacritics, e.g. [U+05D4] HEBREW LETTER HE + [U+0308] COMBINING DIAERESIS to denote [U+0629] ARABIC LETTER TEH MARBUTA), so it would probably be worth checking for Wasla... > long as the UTC and/or WG2 collect the evidence of this use and need, > and then further delay the separate encoding of Wasla (unless it is > also needed and used on other Arabic/Syriac letters or in isolation, I think you may find isolated Wasla in Arabic textbooks and similar literature. Not sure, however, how "serious" this usage is... > something that Miika-Markus also described in his posted message in > 2001). > > Philippe. -- Petr Tomasek <http://www.etf.cuni.cz/~tomasek> Jabber: [email protected] ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ EA 355:001 DU DU DU DU EA 355:002 TU TU TU TU EA 355:003 NU NU NU NU NU NU NU EA 355:004 NA NA NA NA NA ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~
