From: James Kass (email@example.com)
Date: Sun May 30 2004 - 01:14:00 CDT
John Cowan wrote,
> Is strong RTLness really required for PHOENICIAN WORD SEPARATOR? If not,
> it can be unified with MIDDLE DOT.
Doesn't PHOENICIAN WORD SEPARATOR have a unique meaning and
function which give it a separate semantic from MIDDLE DOT?
Further, don't some PH texts use the word separator while others
don't use it? In preserving positional final letterform variants
for round-trip transliteration, might it be desirable to insert
PHOENICIAN WORD SEPARATOR into a PH version which otherwise
wouldn't separate words? If so, wouldn't it be a valid approach for
a font to have an empty glyph mapped to PHOENICIAN WORD
SEPARATOR for the display of this? If so, then a unification of
PHOENICIAN WORD SEPARATOR with MIDDLE DOT would mean
that the display of a plain text document so contructed would
be unable to handle the display of MIDDLE DOT for its normal
The glyphic appearance and positioning of PHOENICIAN WORD SEPARATOR,
for what it's worth, seems to have a much wider variance than
MIDDLE DOT, too.
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun May 30 2004 - 01:15:22 CDT