Re: Arabic letters separated by markup

From: Chris Jacobs (
Date: Sat Jun 11 2005 - 09:35:23 CDT

  • Next message: Peter Kirk: "Re: Arabic letters separated by markup"

    ----- Original Message -----
    From: "Peter Constable" <>
    To: "Unicode Mailing List" <>
    Sent: Friday, June 10, 2005 6:24 PM
    Subject: RE: Arabic letters separated by markup

    > > From: []
    > > On Behalf Of Chris Jacobs
    > > If the HTML requires a multicolor ligature and the font does not have
    > > that multicolor ligature glyph,
    > > then I would expect the rectangular 'missing glyph' symbol.
    > !!
    > Please explain in what way HTML could require a multicolour ligature?

    By requiring that a certain piece of text which already in plaintext was
    required to form a ligature, that this same text must also be multicolor.

    > Or, more generally, how can HTML require a ligature? AFAIK, there is no
    > HTML directive that means "this text must be displayed as a ligature".

    Nor a HTML directive that means "ligaturing override: this text does not
    need to be displayed as a ligature"

    [ but for those who want to display the unligatured arab chars in all their
    ugliness there _is_ a plaintext override ;-) ]

    How about L2 and L3 in section 8.2 ? I take these as normative, meaning that
    these ligatures are not only obligatory in arab language but also obligatory
    according to unicode conformance rules. Am I wrong here?

    > And the *last* thing you want to do is display a rectangle.

    If there is a problem I want to _see_ there is a problem. If I need to
    update my fonts or my rendering engine my old renderer should somehow shout
    "HEY YOU NEED TO UPDATE !!!". and displaying rectangles looks to me a
    sensible way to do that.

    I think that is better than displaying a red aleph where the HTML
    explicitely requires a black one.

    > Peter Constable

    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Sat Jun 11 2005 - 09:42:02 CDT