From: Peter Kirk (peterkirk@qaya.org)
Date: Tue Dec 07 2004 - 05:48:03 CST
On 07/12/2004 07:52, Jony Rosenne wrote:
>...
>
>Consequently, there is and cannot be anything wrong with Unicode (at least
>in this respect) and it does support "ANY sequence of Hebrew vowels and
>consonants".
>
>I do maintain that is some cases the typographic process would require out
>of band assistance in determining the precise presentation desired, and that
>this falls outside the scope of plain text and Unicode.
>
>
>
Jony, I can agree with you on this, for arbitrary combinations of
combining marks. It may not always be entirely clear how these should be
rendered.
But it does seem that there is a long-standing (thousand year) tradition
on how to render certain "non-standard" situations such as an isolated
vowel point at the start of a word (represented in Unicode by NBSP +
vowel point) and two vowel points with a single base character. It can
be hoped that a good typographic process would (in the absence of out of
band assistance telling it to do something different) follow this
long-standing tradition.
In other words: How you choose to represent Qere/Ketiv forms etc is up
to you. But typographic processes should render NBSP + vowel point as a
vowel point below or above a space, and two vowel points with a single
base character should be squeezed around that base character. This is
normal Unicode-compliant typographical practice for combining marks. It
also allows for one way of representing Qere/Ketiv forms, which you are
not obliged to use but is likely (although not guaranteed) to give
sensible results.
Do we really need to continue this discussion?
-- Peter Kirk peter@qaya.org (personal) peterkirk@qaya.org (work) http://www.qaya.org/
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Dec 07 2004 - 11:51:48 CST