Re: ISO 15924: Different Arabic scripts?

From: Andreas Prilop (nhtcapri@rrzn-user.uni-hannover.de)
Date: Fri Nov 18 2005 - 08:16:53 CST

  • Next message: Michael Everson: "Re: ISO 15924: Different Arabic scripts?"

    On Thu, 17 Nov 2005, Michael Everson wrote:

    > ISO 15924 isn't an academic exercise. There were
    > specific bibliographical reasons for giving codes
    > to Latf and Latg. Specifically, a book of
    > Schiller's poetry might be published in Fraktur
    > orthography or in Roman orthography, or a book by
    > Criomhthain might be published in Gaelic
    > orthography or in Roman orthography.
    >
    > Are Kufi or Nastaliq are distinguished in a similar fashion?

    Indeed they are! Persian and Urdu are usually printed in
    Nastaliq, which can be compared to print in Fraktur or Gaelic.
    Persian and Urdu /may/ be printed in Naskh - especially
    when printing in Nastaliq causes problems.
    On the other hand, Arabic is never printed in Nastaliq, afaik.

    I think it would be useful to be able to specify different
    Arabic scripts like "Simplified" and "Traditional" for Chinese.

    Follow the links "Further reading" at
     http://www.unics.uni-hannover.de/nhtcapri/urdu-alphabet.html
    to learn more.



    This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Fri Nov 18 2005 - 08:21:33 CST