From: Kenneth Whistler (kenw@sybase.com)
Date: Wed Apr 28 2004 - 20:25:10 EDT
> So my question is, is this Bidi Class of these numbers correct?
As best we know.
> Since their behavior when used with Khmer would be the same
> as if they had been given Bidi Class L, if it is an error, it is
> understandable how it could have escaped notice by the
> users of this script. If it isn't an error, could someone please
> explain why they are have class ON instead of class L?
Because they were represented to the UTC as being a bunch of
symbols, essentially.
Keep in mind that these are not at all normal digits. They are
exceedingly esoteric, and from the examples in the originating
documents it isn't clear how they lay out with other *Khmer*
characters, let alone any other script.
It is quite likely that there exists no document on the planet
which uses them in a bidirectional context, so your guess
is as good as mine what the original users of these divination
characters would have decided to do if faced with the task
of having to write them in an Arabic document.
--Ken
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Wed Apr 28 2004 - 20:59:53 EDT