Re: Biblical Hebrew (Was: Major Defect in Combining Classes of Tibetan Vowels)

From: John Hudson (
Date: Thu Jun 26 2003 - 16:19:44 EDT

  • Next message: Michael Everson: "Re: Nightmares"

    At 10:09 AM 6/26/2003, wrote:

    > > The Meteg is a completely different issue. There is a small number
    > of places
    > > were the Meteg is placed differently. Since it does not behave the same as
    > > the regular Meteg, and is thus visually distinguishable, it should be
    > > possible to add a character, as long as it is clearly named.
    >That is a potential solution, thought it would have to be *two* additional

    Can you explain your thinking here, Peter? I agree that if the intention is
    to encode new Biblical Hebrew marks with revised combining classes, then
    two new metegs would be necessary if we want one left and one right. But if
    one were to accept the text encoding hack of a ZERO-WIDTH CANONICAL
    ORDERING INHIBITOR -- which seems less and less like a good idea, and more
    and more like a long term embarassment and, like ZWJ and ZWNJ, a pain in
    the neck for users who have every right to expect a sensible encoding that
    doesn't require such gymnastics --, then I think one would only need a new
    HEBREW POINT RIGHT METEG character, and let it be assumed that the existing
    meteg character is the left position form (it's current combining class
    puts it after all vowels, I believe).

    John Hudson

    Tiro Typeworks
    Vancouver, BC

    If you browse in the shelves that, in American bookstores,
    are labeled New Age, you can find there even Saint Augustine,
    who, as far as I know, was not a fascist. But combining Saint
    Augustine and Stonehenge -- that is a symptom of Ur-Fascism.
                                                                 - Umberto Eco

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jun 26 2003 - 17:03:25 EDT