RE: Saudi-Arabian Copyright sign

From: Kenneth Whistler (
Date: Tue Sep 21 2004 - 13:50:12 CDT

  • Next message: Antoine Leca: "Re: Saudi-Arabian Copyright sign"

    Kent wrote:

    > Kenneth Whistler wrote:
    > > Second, there is the question of cursive joining for Arabic.
    > > I don't know anything in the Unicode Standard that states that
    > > a combining enclosing mark breaks cursive ligation. It stands
    > > to reason that it *should*, but I don't know anything that
    > > requires it.
    > Well, according to the Unicode standard, it used to be break
    > the joining on one side (the right side, unless one follows the
    > bidi algorithm literally, and do the join analysis after bidi,
    > in which case it would be the left side). I complained about
    > this (and other things about joining properties), suggesting
    > that "Me" characters (like an enclosing circle) should break
    > the joining on both sides. But the UTC decision was the opposite,
    > but equally good; Me characters should (shall?) not break the
    > joining on any side. This decision was communicated to the
    > bidi list recently:

    Ah yes, I had forgotten about that decision, which has not
    yet been rolled out into data files. (As of now, in Unicode
    4.0.1, gc=Me are not Transparent.

    With this change in place, it seems to me that the case is
    quite clear *for* separate encoding of any circled Arabic
    letter used as a symbol. If the sequence <062D, 20DD> were
    used, instead, it would cursively join inappropriately with
    neighboring Arabic characters, unless surrounded by ZWNJ as


    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Sep 21 2004 - 13:51:56 CDT