From: Peter Kirk (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Thu Jul 24 2003 - 16:40:22 EDT
On 24/07/2003 12:18, John Hudson wrote:
> At 11:46 AM 7/24/2003, Peter Kirk wrote:
>> One of the specific issues he brought up was this one: how do you
>> distinguish the holam-waw vowel combination from the consonant waw
>> followed by the vowel holam?...
> These are display issues, not encoding issues,...
Not entirely. First I need to know what sequence of Unicode characters I
should use to encode holam-waw and aleph with right holam. Garbage in,
garbage out. Then I need to be sure that your sophisticated rendering
system actually makes the required distinctions and is not confused by
any rare cases.
> The way to encode all of the things you mention is pretty
But what is it? There is more than one option, so we all need to use the
> There is a document currently available at
Actually it is not currently available. Fortunately I downloaded it
> ...that displays every sequence of consonant + mark(s) that occurs in
> the BHS text and the Westminster morphological database, with
> post-context consonants. This doesn't give a perfect representation of
> what happens in every circumstance...
Maybe this is why it is missing an adequate representation of one of the
commonest base character + mark sequence in the printed BHS text, holam
+ waw with the holam clearly shown above the right hand side of the waw.
I am looking for example at your he - holam - waw sequences. The holam
is shifted from the he onto the waw as I think it should be, but its
positioning over the waw looks to be the same as in the waw - holam
sequences (where there is no interference with cantillation marks). At
least the distinction is nothing like as clear as in Genesis 4:13 in the
-- Peter Kirk email@example.com http://web.onetel.net.uk/~peterkirk/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jul 24 2003 - 17:18:15 EDT