Re: Hebrew Vav Holam

From: John Cowan (
Date: Thu Jul 31 2003 - 16:56:13 EDT

  • Next message: Peter Kirk: "Re: Hebrew Vav Holam"

    Ted Hopp scripsit:

    > So would this new right-holam character be a combining character?

    Just so.

    > If so, its
    > use should be highly restricted, similar to what is done with shin dot and
    > sin dot. Applying a right-holam character to anything other than a bare vav
    > should be considered an error (no other combining marks should be allowed,
    > including HEBREW ACCENT characters).

    Unicode allows any combining character to be attached to any base character
    whatsoever. However, putting a dagesh into a DEVANAGARI KA, or placing a
    circumflex over an ARABIC MEEM, is pretty certain to cause bad rendering, and
    may screw up other text processes such as syllabication.

    > Would FB4B continue to decompose into 05D5 05B9?

    Yes. Normalization stability requires it.

    > It seems to me that either I'm misinterpreting things, or most people in
    > this discussion would prefer a new combining character to a new base
    > character. If this is so, I'd appreciate an explanation of why, because I
    > don't understand it.

    Assertions of the form "Mark X is only used with base form Y" have proven to
    be false too often in the past.

    John Cowan                              <>    
                    Charles li reis, nostre emperesdre magnes,
                    Set anz totz pleinz ad ested in Espagnes.

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jul 31 2003 - 17:51:16 EDT