From: Andries Brouwer (firstname.lastname@example.org)
Date: Tue Aug 29 2006 - 07:34:32 CDT
On Mon, Aug 28, 2006 at 08:21:06PM -0700, John Hudson wrote:
> Andries Brouwer wrote:
>> I think Uighur uses U+06D5 and U+06BE, but the shaping behaviour
>> of Kurdish H seem to differ from that of Uighur H.
> There is currently uncertainty over the correct encoding of the Uighur h.
> Although U+06BE is the obvious choice based on its shaping, at least some
> Uighur text seems to use the Arabic heh U+0647, which requires dedicated
> Uighur fonts or OT language system tag support.
> The Chinese draft standard for Uighur specifies U+06BE, which seems to me a
> sensible choice.
> Note that the preferred Uighur glyph shapes may vary slightly from those
> used for U+06BE in e.g. Urdu, but the differences are minimal.
> John Hudson
Now that I look at Uyghur, it seems that U+06BE is no good for
Uyghur either, so both Kurdish and Uyghur seem to need a new
As you say, the preferred glyph shapes are very different,
but one might call that a matter of font. Worse is that
the shaping behaviour is different.
Arabic has 4 glyphs: isolated, initial, medial, final heh
(in fact medial heh has two common shapes, but that may be
a matter of font).
Now both Kurdish E and Uyghur E need an isolated form and a
final form, and they both use isolated heh and final heh.
Let us call this behaviour U+06d5. No problem there.
Both Kurdish H and Uyghur H use initial and medial heh,
but the pattern is different:
Position: Isol Init Med Final
Kurdish H: init init med init
Uyghur H: init init med med
Urdu: isol init init isol
If the Urdu behaviour is called U+06be, then that is no good
for Kurdish and Uyghur. Not only are the shapes rather different,
but the distribution of the two shapes over the four positions
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.5 : Tue Aug 29 2006 - 07:40:04 CDT