Re: Yerushala(y)im - or Biblical Hebrew

From: Philippe Verdy (
Date: Thu Jul 03 2003 - 10:20:57 EDT

  • Next message: "RE: Yerushala(y)im - or Biblical Hebrew"

    On Wednesday, July 02, 2003 4:42 PM, Jony Rosenne <> wrote:
    > I cannot agree with some of these statements. My comments are
    > inserted.
    > Jony
    > > Only invalid for Modern Hebrew.
    > No - it is true also for Biblical Hebrew and any other. The extra
    > vowel belongs to another letter, which is known to exist but isn't
    > printed.

    Not printed but also not coded! That's the issue.

    You don't have any code point assigned that means:
    "implicit Hebrew letter"; I'm curious to know which letter(s)
    is/are implied: if there are only a few, then may be they
    could be assigned separate codepoints for each semantic

    As long as this extra *implicit letter* will not be coded, there
    will remain a problem with the NF forms. Some other scripts
    have such "implicit" letters encoded, or "fillers". Not Hebrew...

    Using a CGJ (or a new codepoint to define) to code this implicit
    letter is not a bad idea, and it does not require changing any
    combining class value.

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jul 03 2003 - 11:10:19 EDT