Re: Phoenician character properties

From: James Kass (
Date: Sun May 30 2004 - 01:14:00 CDT

  • Next message: James Kass: "Re: Updated Phoenician proposal: confidential?"

    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
    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.

    Best regards,

    James Kass

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sun May 30 2004 - 01:15:22 CDT