Re: Discrimination for or against Devanagari?

From: Terry Allen (
Date: Thu Jan 09 1997 - 19:36:36 EST

| The ligatures, especially the Arabic ligatures, were encoded
| "for compatibility". That is a polite way of saying they were
| needed to meet some requirement to get the standard approved,
| or were needed for backwards compatibility to some existing
| encoding implementation which had a different model of text
| representation. In the case of the Arabic ligatures, the
| motivation was entirely for standards approval, because there
| was no existing implementation.

What was the specific requirement? I think the Arabic section
is a mess and I can only imagine that it is the union of several
fonts. Is that so? what were the fonts?

| As the Unicode Standard clearly states, the preferred encoding
| of Arabic does not use the encoded Arabic ligatures from
| U+FB50..U+FDFF--and in fact their inclusion in the standard has
| only made full support of Arabic more complicated, rather than
| easier.

And beyond that there are full words and a symbol for "place
of prayer" that I've never seen anywhere (rather like the
"hot springs" symbol; perhaps drawn from some guidebook?).

    Terry Allen Fujitsu Software Corp.
"In going on with these experiments, how many pretty systems do we build,
 which we soon find outselves obliged to destroy?" - Benjamin Franklin
  A Davenport Group Sponsor:

This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.2 : Tue Jul 10 2001 - 17:20:33 EDT