Re: Samaritan Pentateuch sign (perhaps shin, not shan)

From: Peter Kirk (
Date: Thu Jan 15 2004 - 08:30:29 EST

  • Next message: Chris Jacobs: "Re: Klingon"

    On 15/01/2004 04:13, Michael Everson wrote:

    > At 22:10 -0800 2004-01-14, Peter Constable wrote:
    >> > >Now, that said, I am very keen to have the Samaritan shin encoded,
    >>> >because this is used as a mark in the apparatus critici of the BHS
    >>> >and possibly other Bible editions (in BHS it used in citations of
    >>> >Pentateuchi textus Hebraeo-Samaritanus secundum). I'd be perfectly
    >>> >happy to see it encoded as a Letterlike Symbol, since it is being
    >>> >used as a symbol and not as a Samaritan letter.
    >>> Perhaps it must be in any case, due to directionality issues.
    >> Apparently nobody noticed that I submitted a proposal for this thing
    >> last year, the response to which was that it should be left until all of
    >> Samaritan is encoded.
    > We did notice, when we started working on Samaritan. Nobody thought
    > about the directionality issue at the time. D'oh!

    The proposal in question is presumably
    Is it possible that it could be reconsidered in the light of the new
    information, or perhaps better (noting the No answer to question C11
    where bidi properties should be noted) the failure to properly consider
    the old information?

    (Presumably the name shan is a typo, see for the
    name shin)

    Peter Kirk (personal) (work)

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Thu Jan 15 2004 - 09:07:17 EST