RE: Response to Everson Phoenician and why June 7?

From: James Kass (
Date: Sat May 22 2004 - 01:37:53 CDT

  • Next message: Jony Rosenne: "RE: Hebrew DOS (was Response to Everson Phoenician and why June 7?)"

    Dean Snyder wrote,

    > What I said was that most of the Hebrew fonts that people have are Latin
    > clones (i.e., overloaded ASCII), and I would bet that the corresponding
    > Phoenician fonts use the same (ASCII) code points for the same characters
    > as their Hebrew counterparts.

    How could you lose? If an upper-ASCII Phoenician font used differing
    code points for the Phoenician letters than an upper-ASCII Hebrew font
    did for the comparable Hebrew letters, then the Phoenician font wouldn't
    be a corresponding one and the Hebrew font wouldn't be its counterpart.

    But, there were competing code pages for Hebrew and there were some
    font developers who didn't bother to check for precedent, Hebrew or
    otherwise. I have an ASCII range Phoenician font here which maps
    Phoenician glyphs to 'typewriter characters' and has nothing mapped
    in upper-ASCII, but this font was never released.

    However, a similar font might have been used when making this
    which shows the "A Bequest Unearthed - Phoenicia..." home page
    in the English language transliterated into the Phoenician alphabet.
    This transliteration might have been accomplished by a font change,
    or it might have been generated programatically.

    Some Hebrew code pages,

    <quoting from somewhere>
    Hebrew logical (windows-1255)
    Hebrew implicit (ISO-8859-8I, similar but not identical to the one above)
    Hebrew visual
    Hebrew DOS (which is almost not in use)
    <end quote>

    The attached small graphic shows a crop of the top of this letter
    in Notepad with a simple font switch.

    Best regards,

    James Kass


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat May 22 2004 - 01:38:45 CDT